Keywords: Sólyom, Hungary, European law, free movement of persons, president
Abstract: The article critically analyses the approach of the Court of Justice of the EU to the relation between international and EU law, demonstrated by the Court’s judgement in a Hungarian-Slovak dispute concerning intended visit of Hungarian president L. Sólyom to Southern Slovakia in August 2009 (C-364/10, Hungary versus Slovak Republic). The article presents arguments of individual actors involved (Slovak note banning Sólyom from entering Slovakia, Hungarian complaint, opinion of Advocate General, judgment of the Court of Justice) that cover virtually all possible varieties of relationship between the EU and international law. While the article agrees with the Court’s conclusions in the Sólyom case, it criticises the Court for avoiding several important issues in its judgment, making the EU’s regime for mobility of diplomats and governmental officials less predictable in the future. Further, the article calls for more tolerance of the EU law to a possibility that similar EU law disputes with strong element of international law could be decided by other judicial bodies than the EU Court of Justice.