College aantekeningen
Summary Lectures - EU Legal Remedies
- Instelling
- Universiteit Van Amsterdam (UvA)
Summary of ALL lectures for the Master EU Law at Uva
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 4 van de 61 pagina's
Voorbeeld 4 van de 61 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
EXAM1 question on week 1&2 (direct actions)
1 question on week 3
1 question on PRP
1 question on anything
- Submission of written moot court → WEEK 6
Lecture 1: The ECJ as an institution
Institutions of the EU
● Before Lisbon 5 EU institutions:
1. Council (of the European Union)
- Made up of heads of state
- Belonging to all 3 pillars
2. European Parliament
3. Commission (of the European Communities)
- Most important powers found in 1st pillar
4. Court of Justice (of the European Communities); ECJ
- Most powers found in former EC Treaties
5. European Court of Auditors
○ One ‘truly’ EU institution → European Council
● Lisbon Treaty
○ 7 EU institutions:
1. Council
2. EP
3. Commission
4. CJEU of the EU
- Court of the whole EU
- Lisbon expanded jurisdiction of Court to some CFSP areas
5. European Court of auditors
6. European Council
7. European Central Bank
→ ART. 13 TEU
,The ECJ/CJEU
● The ECJ/CJEU
○ Seated in Luxembourg
○ Before lisbon:
■ used to consist of 3 bodies:
a. Court of Justice (ECJ)
b. Court of First Instance (CFI)
- Since SEA 1987
- Attached to ECJ
- Task: disputes between private individuals & EU institutions =
competition law
c. Judicial Chambers
○ After Lisbon → art. 19 TEU = ECJ is composed of:
1. Court of Justice
2. General Court
- Replaces court of 1st instance
- Task: private individuals & institutions
- Made of 54 judges
3. Specialized Courts
- Replaced judicial chambers
- Task: dispute between civil service of institutions & the institutions
they work for
- Does not exist anymore → since regulation 2016/1192 = general
court took over
→ problem: disagreement between different parts of the same institution:
Strack case
● Facts
○ Focuses on EU Social Policy
○ All 3 part of institution → come to different conclusions
○ Ms Strack → civil service worker wanted to transfer unused annual leave to next year
● Question: Whether an EU civil service can carry to the next year unused annual leave?
● Ruling
○ Commission → can’t do this
- Strack → brought case before CST
○ CST → YES you can bring it to next academic year
○ Commission → Wrong = launches appeal to General Court
, ○ General Court → Commission was right → it is not possible
○ Then appeal to ECJ →
○ ECJ: Strack is right you can carry it to next year
Composition of CJEU
● ECJ
○ 27 judges
○ Must be good lawyers → appointed by MS for 6 years (art. 253 TFEU)
○ New under lisbon (art. 255) → a panel consisting of 7 people
■ To give opinion on candidates’ suitability (non-binding)
○ 11 Advocate general
○ 6 permanent & 5 rotating from small countries
○ Have to be:
a. Impartial
b. Independent
○ Role:
■ Makes reasoned opinions on cases before ECJ , not GC (art. 252 TFEU)
○ Declaration (no. 38) ad Art. 252 TFEU regarding number of AG in ECJ
■ If the ECJ requests that number of AG be increased by three [11
instead of 8], Council will, acting unanimously, agree on increase
● General Court
○ 54 judges (2 per MS)
○ Requirements: be independent
Role of ECJ in EU Constitutional Order: its tasks & competences
● Lisbon
○ General tasks before Lisbon:
■ ECJ → ensure interpretation & application of the treaty & law is observed
○ General tasks after lisbon:
■ Shall ensure interpretation and application of the Treaties & ensure that law
is observed (art. 19(1) TEU)
● 3 categories of competences/jurisdiction: (art. 19(3) TEU)
1. Direct actions
- Dispute settlement → 4 types of disputes:
a. Institution vs institution
, b. MS vs MS
- Directly via court → not national court
c. MS vs institution (or vice versa)
- Action for annulment → art. 263 TFEU
- Infringement action (Commission vs MS) → art. 258 TFEU
d. Private individuals vs institution →
- first GC → then ECJ
- Mainly disputes on competition law
→ NOT individual vs individual
2. Give preliminary rulings
- Who?
- National court is competent
- Only ECJ can give PRP → Not the GC
- Binding rule of ECJ → but PSPP case
- When?
- At request of national judges → art. 267 TFEU
- National court of the MS has to try & solve dispute
- First go to national court → then can ask PRP
- 2 options:
a. Vertical → Private individuals vs MS
b. Horizontal → Private individuals vs private individuals
- 2 different national courts:
- Subordinate court → may refer
- Supreme court → must refer
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper StudentLAW2024. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €10,56. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 51662 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 15 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen