The Cumulative Interpretative Approach of the Court of Justice: Friend or Foe in Criminal Matters?

This article explores the interpretative methodology of the Court of Justice in the field of judicial cooperation in criminal matters, a policy area that is highly sensitive for Member States. Building on the empirical work of Beck and Dederichs, the study analyses 336 preliminary rulings delivered in 2023 together with 61 Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) cases from 2018 to 2023. Four main interpretative methods are identified, textual, systemic, teleological, and historical, and their prevalence, combination, and weight are assessed. The findings confirm the persistence of a ‘cumulative’ (Beck) interpretative approach, in which several methods are combined without hierarchy. Systemic and textual reasoning dominate, teleological arguments are particularly common in JHA cases, and historical reasoning is rare. The article concludes that while this cumulative methodology enables flexibility and coherence, it also generates interpretative unpredictability, which in the sensitive field of criminal law may endanger legal certainty, Member State trust, and the legitimacy of EU integration.