oscola.pdf. - Mirrors.med.harvard.edu

Example 34 shows how it can sometimes be a good idea to include hyphenation
information for eu cases, which can help to ensure proper linebreaking.
@jurisdiction{C430/93,
}
keywords = {eu},
title = {Jereon van Schijndel v Stichting
shorttitle = {van Schijndel},
Pensioenfonds voor Fysiotherapeuten},
number = {C-430/93--C-431/93},
institution = {ECJ},
journaltitle = {ECR},
volume = {I},
pages = {4705},
hyphenation = {dutch},
@jurisdiction{T344/99,
}
keywords = {eu},
title = {Arne Mathisen AS v Council},
shorttitle = {Arne Mathisen},
number = {T-344/99},
institution = {CFI},
journaltitle = {ECR},
volume = {II},
pages = {2905},
date = {2002},
Example 36 shows a case that is not (yet) reported in the ECR reports,
but available only in the Official Journal. Although oscola suggests that in
those circumstances the citation should be to OJ, my own view would be that
in such cases it is probably better either to give an ECR reference with the
pages set to 0000—as is very common practice—leaving it to the reader to find
the case online, which is not difficult, or to give an online reference.
@jurisdiction{C556/07,
}
keywords = {eu},
title = {Commission v France},
date = {2009},
journaltitle = {OJ},
series = {C},
volume = {102},
pages = {8},
number = {C-556/07},
institution = {ECJ},
\cite{adbhu} Case 240/83 Procureur de la République v ADBHU [1985]
ECR 531
European Union Cases 32
[34]
[35]
[36]