Focusing on the 2004 EU enlargement to CEE member states this paper provides a multidisciplinary, comparative investigation of transformation of the functions and the roles of national courts following accession to EU. Analysis presented in this paper builds on the dataset of Estonian and Latvian case law from 2004-2009 (Dr. Jur. PhD thesis). The paper addresses the following key questions: how Estonian and Latvian courts promote coherence and sustainability of the legal systems while fulfilling new legal obligations following from the EU membership; whether and how institutional (independence of courts, professionalism) and legal-doctrinal (textual positivism) post-Communist legacies impact exercise of EU mandate by national courts? What types of legal conflicts emerge and whether courts justify enforcement of EU legal norms and rights to citizens? And what does those national CEE flavours bring to the project of European legal integration and ultimately to our understanding of the democracy in the enlarged EU? Based on the analysis of the case law this paper will argue that national courts (including ordinary courts) are neither slow nor unable to successfully transform, overcome inheritance of post-Communist legal system and culture, and adapt to the new EU law mandate as well as actively participate in the project of European constitutionalisation.
