Judicial protection in the EU
Inhoudsopgave
1 THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM OF THE EU................................................................................................................ 5
1.1 THE EUROPEAN UNION IS NOT A STATE.................................................................................................................5
1.2 IT COMES AS NO SURPRISE THAT THE COURT OF THE JUSTICE OF THE EU......................................................................5
1.3 APPLICATION OF EU LAW IS SHARE BETWEEN NATIONAL AND EUROPEAN JUDGES..........................................................6
1.4 NATIONAL JUDGES.............................................................................................................................................6
1.5 THE EU COURTS................................................................................................................................................8
1.5.1 History....................................................................................................................................................10
1.5.2 Court of Justice.......................................................................................................................................11
1.5.3 General Court.........................................................................................................................................12
1.6 SPECIALISED COURTS (257 TFEU)......................................................................................................................12
1.7 PROCEDURE................................................................................................................................................... 13
1.7.1 General...................................................................................................................................................13
1.7.2 ‘Ordinary’ procedure..............................................................................................................................13
1.8 A JUDGMENT IN A REASONABLE TIME?................................................................................................................15
2 ACTION FOR INFRINGEMENT..................................................................................................................... 18
2.1 LEGAL BASIS AND DESCRIPTION OF THE PROCEDURE................................................................................................18
2.2 WHO IS INVOLVED?.........................................................................................................................................18
2.3 WHICH BREACHES OF EU LAW?.........................................................................................................................18
2.3.1 Conditions..............................................................................................................................................18
2.3.2 Defense of and by the MS......................................................................................................................20
2.4 WHO CAN ACT?..............................................................................................................................................21
2.5 SPECIFIC ELEMENTS OF THE PROCEDURE...............................................................................................................22
2.5.1 Administrative or pre-litigation stage....................................................................................................22
2.5.2 Judicial stage..........................................................................................................................................24
2.6 THE EFFECTS OF A JUDGMENT OF THE COURT FINDING AN INFRINGEMENT..................................................................25
2.7 MODIFICATIONS OF THE LISBON TREATY..............................................................................................................26
2.8 WHICH IS THE COMPETENT COURT?....................................................................................................................27
3 ACTION FOR ANNULMENT......................................................................................................................... 27
3.1 LEGAL BASIS AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROCEDURE...................................................................................27
3.2 WHO IS INVOLVED OR WHICH ACTS ARE TARGETED?...............................................................................................27
3.2.1 Before the Treaty of Lisbon....................................................................................................................27
3.2.2 Article 263 TFEU.....................................................................................................................................29
3.3 WHICH BREACHES OF EU LAW?.........................................................................................................................31
3.3.1 Which acts can be challenged?..............................................................................................................31
3.3.2 Which grounds for annulment?.............................................................................................................34
3.4 WHO CAN ACT?..............................................................................................................................................35
3.5 SPECIFIC ELEMENTS OF THE PROCEDURE...............................................................................................................41
3.6 EFFECTS OF THE ANNULMENT DECISION...............................................................................................................42
3.6.1 The act is annulled.................................................................................................................................42
3.6.2 Article 266 TFEU.....................................................................................................................................42
3.7 WHICH IS THE COMPETENT COURT?....................................................................................................................43
3.8 INNOVATIONS OF THE LISBON TREATY.................................................................................................................43
1
, 3.9 DISPUTES BETWEEN THE EU AND ITS CIVIL SERVANTS (ARTICLE 270 TFEU)................................................................43
3.10 UNLIMITED JURISDICTION (ARTICLE 261 TFEU)..................................................................................................43
4 ACTION FOR FAILURE TO ACT.................................................................................................................... 45
4.1 LEGAL BASIS AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROCEDURE...................................................................................45
4.2 WHO CAN BE ATTACKED?.................................................................................................................................46
4.2.1 Before Lisbon..........................................................................................................................................46
4.2.2 Article 265 TFEU (Treaty of Lisbon)........................................................................................................46
4.3 WHICH BREACHES OF EU LAW?.........................................................................................................................46
4.4 WHO CAN ACT?..............................................................................................................................................46
4.5 SPECIFIC FEATURES OF THE PROCEDURE...............................................................................................................47
4.6 EFFECTS OF THE JUDGMENT DECLARING A FAILURE TO ACT.......................................................................................47
4.7 WHICH IS THE COMPETENT COURT?....................................................................................................................48
5 ACTION FOR DAMAGES............................................................................................................................. 49
5.1 LEGAL BASIS AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROCEDURE...................................................................................50
5.2 WHO IS INVOLVED AND WHAT CAN BE TARGETED?................................................................................................50
5.2.1 NLEU.......................................................................................................................................................50
5.2.2 NLMS......................................................................................................................................................51
5.3 SUBSTANTIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR LIABILITY..........................................................................................................51
5.3.1 NLEU.......................................................................................................................................................51
5.3.2 NLMS......................................................................................................................................................54
5.4 WHO CAN ACT?..............................................................................................................................................57
5.5 PROCEDURE (NLEU)........................................................................................................................................57
5.6 EFFECTS.........................................................................................................................................................58
5.7 WHICH IS THE COMPETENT COURT?....................................................................................................................58
6 PRELIMINARY RULINGS............................................................................................................................. 58
6.1 PRELIMINARY RULINGS “CONCERNING THE INTERPRETATION OF THE TREATIES” (ARTICLE 267 PARAGRAPH 1A).................59
6.1.1 Legal basis and description of the mechanism......................................................................................59
6.1.2 Who would have violated EU law? Who invokes EU law?.....................................................................59
6.1.3 Who may or shall refer a preliminary question to the ECJ?...................................................................59
6.1.4 What can the preliminary reference relate to?.....................................................................................65
6.1.5 Specific elements of the mechanism (article 23 Statute ICJ and 93-114 Rule of procedure).................66
6.1.6 Effects of a judgment delivered under the preliminary ruling procedure..............................................68
6.1.7 Which is the competent Court?..............................................................................................................69
6.1.8 Lisbon Treaty..........................................................................................................................................69
6.2 PRELIMINARY RULINGS “CONCERNING THE VALIDITY OF ACTS OF THE INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES OR AGENCIES OF THE
UNION (ARTICLE 267 PARAGRAPH 1B)......................................................................................................................70
6.2.1 Legal basis and description of the mechanism......................................................................................70
6.2.2 Which violation of EU law?....................................................................................................................70
6.2.3 Who may or shall refer a question for a preliminary ruling on the validity of EU law?........................71
6.2.4 What can the preliminary reference relate to?.....................................................................................71
6.2.5 Specific elements of the mechanism......................................................................................................72
6.2.6 Effects of a judgment delivered under the preliminary ruling procedure..............................................72
7 OBJECTION OF ILLEGALITY......................................................................................................................... 74
7.1 A LEGAL BASIS AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION...........................................................................................................75
7.2 WHICH ACTS ARE CONCERNED?..........................................................................................................................75
7.2.1 Before the Lisbon Treaty........................................................................................................................75
7.2.2 Article 277 TFEU.....................................................................................................................................76
2
, 7.3 WHICH VIOLATIONS?.......................................................................................................................................76
7.4 WHO CAN RAISE A PLEA OF ILLEGALITY?...............................................................................................................76
7.5 SPECIFIC ELEMENTS OF THE PROCEDURE...............................................................................................................78
7.6 EFFECTS OF THE CJEU’S DECISION TO ACCEPT THE OBJECTION OF ILLEGALITY..............................................................78
7.7 WHICH IS THE COMPETENT COURT?....................................................................................................................78
7.8 LISBON TREATY (ARTICLE 277 TFEU)..................................................................................................................78
8 APPEALS AGAINST GENERAL COURT AND SPECIALIZED COURTS’ DECISIONS..............................................80
8.1 LEGAL BASIS AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION..............................................................................................................80
8.2 WHICH ACTS ARE CONCERNED?..........................................................................................................................81
8.3 WHICH GROUNDS CAN BE INVOKED TO JUSTIFY AN APPEAL?....................................................................................81
8.4 WHO CAN ACT?..............................................................................................................................................82
8.5 SPECIFIC ELEMENTS OF THE PROCEDURE...............................................................................................................82
8.6 EFFECTS OF A JUDGMENT ON APPEAL..................................................................................................................83
8.7 WHICH IS THE COMPETENT COURT?....................................................................................................................84
9 OPINIONS................................................................................................................................................. 84
9.1 LEGAL BASIS AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION..............................................................................................................84
9.2 ON WHAT CAN THE COURT OF JUSTICE BE INVITED TO GIVE A PRELIMINARY OPINION?..................................................85
9.3 WHO CAN BRING AN ACTION BEFORE THE COURT?................................................................................................85
9.4 SPECIFIC ELEMENTS OF THE PROCEDURE...............................................................................................................86
9.5 EFFECTS OF THE OPINION..................................................................................................................................86
9.6 WHICH IS THE COMPETENT COURT?....................................................................................................................86
10 INTERIM MEASURES................................................................................................................................ 86
10.1 LEGAL BASIS AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION............................................................................................................86
10.2 WHO CAN ASK FOR INTERIM MEASURES?...........................................................................................................88
10.3 CONDITIONS (CUMULATIVE)............................................................................................................................88
10.3.1 Fumus boni juris (article 160 §3 RPC)..................................................................................................88
10.3.2 Urgency (serious and irreparable damage) (article 160 §3 RPC).........................................................89
10.3.3 Balancing of interests (based case law)...............................................................................................90
10.4 SPECIFIC ELEMENTS OF THE PROCEDURE.............................................................................................................91
10.5 EFFECTS OF AN ORDER FOR INTERIM MEASURES...................................................................................................91
10.6 WHICH IS THE COMPETENT COURT....................................................................................................................91
11 OTHER COMPETENCES OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE AND OF THE GENERAL COURT.....................................92
11.1 COMPETENCES BASED ON AN ARBITRATION CLAUSE..............................................................................................92
11.1.1 Contractual arbitration........................................................................................................................92
11.1.2 Special agreement...............................................................................................................................93
11.2 COMPETENCES BASED ON OTHER TEXTS THAN THE EU OF TFEU TREATIES................................................................93
12 COMPETENCES OF THE EU JUDGE IN CFSP AND JHA MATTERS..................................................................93
3
,4
,1 The judicial system of the EU
The judicial branch of government of the EU is quite unique, because the EU is itself a quite unique
legal construct
1.1 The European Union is not a state
The European Union is an international organisation (because it had been created by a treaty).
However, it is very different from any other international organisation:
- 1) Because of the extent and intensity of its powers
o There is no other IO with so many competences and so many powers
o The EU has legislative, executive and judicial powers
Many IO’s don’t have this
o Member states have given their competences to the EU through the Lisbon treaty
Eg: monetary policy, internal market with free movement, competition, Charter
of Fundamental Rights, immigration, cooperation in the field of justice and
home affairs, social policy
- 2) Because European law is not only applicable to MS, but also to individuals
o Normal people can invoke EU law before a judge
- 3) Because the Treaty looks increasingly like Europe’s Constitution
o Common points:
A. EU organizes the division of powers inside the EU and between the states
and the EU = work of a constitution
B. The Constitution is the highest rule in Belgium in the EU, the treaty is
the highest rule, and every other rule has to be consistent with it
C. You find all the big basic principles (like equality, non-discrimination…) in
the treaty
HOWEVER the EU is still based on an international treaty
- Not only by name and origin, but also because MS – and only them – have the power to
modify it
o Biggest difference between the treaty and the constitution
o The Belgian constitution can only be changed by the Belgian authorities
>< The EU treaty cannot be changed by the European authorities, it can only
be changed by another treaty that is signed and ratified by the national
authorities of all the MS (and unanimity is required)
- The aims, territorial scope and legitimacy of European integration are not yet sufficient or well-
defined enough
- European treaties are still indirectly based on national constitutions
o Belgium cannot sign another treaty unless it is consistent with the Belgian Constitution
1.2 It comes as no surprise that the Court of the Justice of the EU
- Is not like other international courts: the CJEU has the same type of powers as the
national judges this is not the case for other international courts
o >< ICJ (of the UN): is not a true judge, but an arbitrator
o >< Appellate Body of the WTO : not a true judge, because the decision of the
Appellate Body doesn’t need to be executed, there is no obligation to do so
If you don’t execute, you go back to the Appellate Body, which gives the
winner the right to inflict the same commercial damage = ‘legal revanche’
- Resembles national courts more closely than any other international court
o CJEU looks like a constitutional court in the MS for the same reasons we have
described, because it is the highest court in the legal order, it has jurisdiction to make
effective or control the division of powers between the states and EU and between the
institutions of the EU + has to ensure the protection of fundamental rights (because
the Charter of Fundamental Rights has binding force)
5
, o No appeal possible against judgments of the CJEU!
This unique character has been reinforced by:
- A) Direct effect of EU law (Van Gend & Loos)
o Custom rights are forbidden since ’58. NL said ‘this is not applicable for the
companies, we only have an obligation to the state of Belgium’
o Court said: ‘no, the rule is in direct effect’ (>< international law: direct effect is the
exception)
- B) The principle of primacy of EU law (Costa v. ENEL, Simmenthal)
- C) Member states liability for damages resulting from breach of EU law (Francovich,
Brasserie du Pecheur)
o When a MS is violating EU law, the citizens before the national judges should receive
damages
Also read the case NE (C-205/20)! It is a good summary about direct effect and primacy
1.3 Application of EU law is share between national and European
judges
Conferral of competences – subsidiarity
- The application of EU law is shared between national and European judges
o The number of cases of EU law going to national judges is far more important than the
number of cases going to the CJEU
o So the judicial application is shared of EU law is shared by national judges and the
CJEU
- Article 5: two principles:
o §2: Conferral of competences: EU has no other competences than the one conferred
to it by the treaty (if not, it remains national)
Same for the CJEU
o §3: Subsidiarity: the EU can only act if, and in so far the objective of the action cannot
be sufficiently achieved by the MS
1.4 National judges
MUST apply EU law (with or without preliminary reference)
“Juges de droit commun”
- A) Principle of sincere cooperation (applicable to the judiciary) article 4 §3 TEU
o Both the EU and the MS are obliged to cooperate sincerely, they have to assist each
other
o A Member State is always 1, so Flanders for example cannot say ‘we didn’t accept
this, the Walloon part did this’
And if the principle of sincere cooperation is applicable to the MS, it means
that that includes an obligation for the executive, legislative and judiciary
branch (including the national judges) to cooperate and to assist each other
The national judges have to make sure that EU law is applied
- B) Principle of primacy of EU law
o ! Relationship international law – EU law
o National judge has the duty to not apply and set aside the conflicting national law
o Poplawski (C-573/17)
The national judge has to set aside the national law, which is conflicting with
EU law, if the EU rule concerned has direct effect (= if this rule can be invoked
by a citizen, the associations, companies… = all natural persons) that is a
limitation
6
, o Minister for Justice and Equality (Ireland) (C-378/17, §38)
Duty to disapply national legislation that is contrary to Union law
But this case adds that this duty is also for all authorities of the state
(remember: the state is one, including administrative authorities)
So not only the judges, but also the administrative authorities have to
set it aside because:
o The state is not only 1 vertically
o But also horizontally: it concerns all the public authorities
whatever the type of power (legislative, judiciary or executive)
- C) Principle of direct effect can be invoked by citizens/natural persons
o Three conditions for the direct effect:
1) Sufficiently clear
2) Precise
3) Unconditional
it should be able to be applied in concreto
o What do we do with provisions that don’t have direct effect?
Poplawski (C-573/17, §73): even the provisions that don’t have direct effect,
can be binding
But if the provision is not sufficiently clear or precise, the national
judges have to interpret the provision
- D) Duty to interpret national law in conformity with EU law
o Poplawski (C-573/17, §73): national authorities are required to interpret the text to
the greatest extent possible in the light and purpose of the framework in order to
achieve the same as the European decision
o If the national judge is confronted to 2 possible interpretations of national law, he has
to choose the possible interpretation of his law which is as close as possible to the
European text
- E) Institutional and procedural autonomy of member states
o = the MS can decide which institution is going to manage the remedies, which
institution is going to take the decisions to apply EU law?
Eg in Belgium, when there is a conflict between an employee and his
employer, the labour court will have jurisdiction. But other countries don’t
have a labour court and there, the parties will have to go to the civil court
this is the autonomy of the state, they can decide this themselves
= institutional and procedural autonomy
o Member States are autonomous, but they have to respect two principles:
Principles of equivalence: in your legislation, you may not have a procedural
treatment or an institutional treatment which is different for the claims based
on national law and the claims based on EU law you need to be the same
for both
Principle of effectiveness: even if you respect the principle of equivalence,
your legislation is not allowed to make it virtually impossible or excessively
difficult to execute EU law
o Duty under EU law to challenge an administrative or judicial national decision when it
has become final?
If it appears that it is non-consistent with EU law, is there then a duty to
change a national decision? No
Kapferer Case (C-234/04)
The Court said no. it is not because a judge in a MS has decided with
a judgment that is final and that is against EU law, that you have to
change or to have a procedure to change its decision
Priority is given to legal certainty (= the decision of the judge or even
the decision of the administration is final, so there is no duty of the
national judges or the member state to change the decision or to
create a procedure to change the decision
7
, But there are some (very restricted) exceptions, that are given in the
first five cases of the list of this chapter
Preliminary reference
- On interpretation
- On validity
The Treaty now deals explicitly with the role of national judges:
- Article 19 §1 al. 2 TEU: “Member States shall provide remedies sufficient to ensure effective
legal protection in the fields covered by Union law”
- Article 2 TEU: values of the EU
- Article 47 of the Charter: effective judicial protection
the CJEU has developed case law against some MS based on this 3 articles:
- You have to respect the rule of law (by respecting article 19)
- Judges need to impartial and independent
- List of Polish cases where the Court had ruled that the judicial system in Poland was not
consistent with article 2, 19 and 47 of the Charter
- Weiss: the Constitutional Court of Germany asked the CJEU whether the program of the ECB
was consistent with the treaty
o The CJEU answered: there is no problem of validity, what the ECB did was perfectly
legal and valid
o But the Constitutional Court of Germany didn’t accept this judgment said that the
answer of the CJEU was not clear and that the CJEU acted ultra vires
so there is danger that if the rule of law is not respected, that the decisions of the CJEU won’t be
executed by the political bodies
1.5 The EU courts
Article 19 TEU: the Court of Justice of the European Union
- The Court of Justice
o In the Court of Justice of the European Union as an institution, you have 2 courts:
1) The Court of Justice/the Court itself (with the same name as the institution)
2) The General Court, which is below the Court of Justice
- The General Court (old name: first instance)
- Specialised courts (old name: judicial panels)
o There is a possibility to create specialized courts, but for now there are no specialized
courts
o Now we only have the CJEU and the General Court
REMEMBER:
- The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) = the institution
- The Court of Justice or the Court = the supreme court
Legislative competences of the institution (CJEU)
- Article 257 (ex-article 225 A TCE): establishment of specialized courts:
o ‘The European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary
legislative procedure, may establish specialised courts attached to the General Court
to hear and determine at first instance certain classes of action or proceeding brought
in specific areas. The European Parliament and the Council shall act by means of
regulations either on a proposal from the Commission after consultation of the
Court of Justice or at the request of the Court of Justice after consultation of the
Commission’.
o Why do we call this a legislative role of the CJEU? Because a specialized court can
only be created by a decision with the ordinary legislative procedure (decision of the
8
, Council and the European Parliament and on proposal of the Court and the European
Commission)
It cannot be created without the intervention of the CJEU
- Article 281 (ex-article 245 TEC): Statute:
o ‘The Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union shall be laid down in a
separate Protocol.
This Statute is a protocol with the same force as a treaty
Normally can only be changed with the procedure to change the treaty
Procedure to change the treaty:
o Intergovernmental negotiation and conference
o All the 27 MS have to meet
o There has to be unanimity, they have to agree on a text
o They have to sign it
o They have to ratify it
but this is way to difficult
So here, a specific procedure has been introduced to change the statute
of the CJEU: this procedure is the same procedure that is used to create
specialized courts:
There has to be a proposal of the Commission OR the Court of
Justice
o If the proposal is coming from the Commission, the CJEU
gives an opinion
o If the proposal is coming from the CJEU, the Commission
gives an opinion
And then the decision is taken with the ordinary legislative
procedure by the Council and the European Parliament they
have to agree on each word, but there are 2 exceptions
o Title 1 of the Statute
o And Article 64 (linguistic regime)
they cannot be changed with this procedure, they need to be
changed with the same procedure that is used to change treaties
o The European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary
legislative procedure, may amend the provisions of the Statute, with the exception
of Title I and Article 64. The European Parliament and the Council shall act either
at the request of the
Court of Justice and after consultation of the Commission, or on a proposal from
the Commission and after consultation of the Court of Justice’
What are the applicable provisions?
- 1. The treaties (= primary law):
o TEU: articles 13 and 19
o TFEU: articles 251 to 281
- 2. The Statute of the Court of Justice of the EU
o = a protocol
o ‘The Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union shall be laid down in a
separate Protocol’ (art. 281, al. 1 TFEU)
o Therefore, the Statute is to be modified like a treaty
o However, specific rules for its modification (281, al.
o 2 TFEU):
9
, ‘The European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the
ordinary legislative procedure, may amend the provisions of the Statute,
with the exception of Title I and Article 64. The European Parliament and
the Council shall act either at the request of the Court of Justice and after
consultation of the Commission, or on a proposal from the Commission
and after consultation of the Court of Justice’
Title I: modified like a Treaty
Article 64 (rules on languages): OLP (article 281, al. 2, with
unanimity requirements)
- 3. Rules of procedure (= secondary law):
o … of the Court (article 253, al. 6 TFEU)
o … of the General Court (article 254, al. 5 TFEU)
o …(of the Civil Service Tribunal (article 257, al. 5 TFEU))
Does not exist anymore
1.5.1 History
- A) 1952-1989: one court only: the Court of Justice of the European Communities (CJEC)
- B) 1989: creation of the Court of First Instance (CFI)
o The General Court had another name in the beginning
o Throughout the years, the number of cases brought to the CJEU increased
To reduce the workload of the CJEU the MS decided to create another court
named ‘the Court of First Instance’
- C) 1989-2003: competences of CFI gradually increased: more cases were given to the
CFI/the General Court
o All the cases brought by natural or legal persons (citizens, companies, associations,
private parties) were going to the General Court
Advantage if you can go to the General Court first: you can still appeal so
you have a double degree of jurisdiction!
If you go directly to the Court of Justice, you don’t have the possibility to
appeal
o All the other cases brought by the institutions or MS were going directly to the Court of
Justice
- D) 2003: it becomes possible to create ‘judicial panels’ (= specialized courts under the
GC/CFI)
- E) 2005-2016: specialized courts are competent to deal with specific areas:
o The ‘Civil Service Tribunal of the European Union’ was created in 2004. It operated
since 2005
= a kind of labor law court, it had jurisdiction for the conflicts between a
European institution and its employees
= example of one of the only specialized courts
o The European Commission proposed in 2003 the creation of another judicial panel be
created: the ‘Community Patent Court
o Creation on the basis of a joint decision of the Parliament and Council (OLP =
Ordinary Legislative Proposal) with participation of the Court and the Commission
(article 257 TFEU)
o But there still was a problem of workload at the level of the General Court: some
cases took a very long time to be decided, especially for competition law
In 2012: some judges proposed to increase the number of judges at the
General Court with 12 judges. At that time there were 28 judges at the Court
and 7 at the Civil Service Tribunal.
But the Council of the EU said that this wasn’t possible because this
was too expensive
Two years later, the CJEU proposed an increasement of not 12, but
only 9 judges, but the Council still said that this was too expensive
10
