13Infringement Procedure in EU Law

A legal process to ensure Member States comply with EU law. It involves two stages: pre-litigation and litigation.

The Commission is primarily responsible for initiating the infringement procedure, acting as the 'guardian' of EU law.

The infringement procedure applies to violations of all EU law, including Treaties, regulations, directives, and international agreements.

This stage involves the Commission investigating and attempting to resolve the violation through dialogue and discussions with the Member State.

If the pre-litigation stage fails to resolve the violation, the Commission can bring the case before the Court of Justice of the European Union.

The purpose is to protect the effective judicial protection of rights in relation to EU law by ensuring Member States provide sufficient legal remedies.

Exceptions exist for specific procedures, such as non-compliance with rules on excessive deficits and state aid.

While the Commission is typically the initiator, Member States can also, in limited cases, raise infringement procedures against other Member States.

The first stage of the EU infringement procedure, where the Commission sends a non-formal notification to a Member State outlining its objections to a certain policy or practice.

The Member State has the opportunity to respond to the letter of formal notice and defend its position.

If the Commission is not satisfied with the Member State's response, it sends a reasoned opinion, formally outlining the violations and outlining the deadline to comply.

A clear explanation of the specific violations found, providing a timeframe for the Member State to take action.

The reasoned opinion is a confidential document, only shared with the concerned Member State.

The subject of the infringement cannot be changed in the reasoned opinion, it remains consistent with the initial letter.

The reasoned opinion effectively solidifies the subject of the infringement and serves as a guarantee for the Member State.

The EU Commission is involved in all infringement proceedings, even if the dispute is between two specific Member States.

Individuals cannot initiate a case against a Member State in the CJEU for breaking EU law.

Any action or inaction by a Member State that violates EU law can be considered an infringement.

The Commission doesn't need to prove the Member State intended to violate EU law.

The Commission doesn't need to prove that the violation caused any harm.

A Member State cannot escape liability by claiming the violation did not cause any harm.

Failing to comply with a directive is one of the most common examples of infringement.

The infringement must still be happening when the Commission identifies and pursues it. The purpose of this procedure is to stop the violation and make the Member State comply with EU law.

The Commission monitors Member States' compliance with EU law, often relying on complaints from citizens or businesses.

A structured dialogue between the Commission and a Member State before formal infringement proceedings begin, aimed at resolving issues quickly.

The Commission can choose whether to start an infringement proceeding, even after receiving a complaint.

A legal action against the Commission for failing to act cannot be pursued if the Commission has not initiated an infringement procedure.

Individuals who have complained can access the Commission's investigation file, ensuring transparency.

The pre-litigation phase in an infringement procedure must respect the principle of fairness and opportunity for both sides to present their case.

The two stages of the pre-litigation phase in an infringement procedure: a letter of formal notice and a reasoned opinion.

Interim measures are temporary actions taken by the EU to address a potential infringement of EU law before a full legal process is concluded. These measures are taken under Article 279 TFEU and can include sanctions.

The European Commission has the right to bring legal actions against a Member State that is not complying with EU law. However, the application to initiate the action can only be submitted after the deadline for compliance set out in the reasoned opinion has expired.

The deadline for the Commission to file a legal action against a Member State for non-compliance with EU law is not fixed. The Commission can delay the filing if it believes the State will eventually comply.

The Commission assesses the non-compliance of a Member State with EU law based on the deadline set out in the reasoned opinion. If the State has not complied by that deadline, the Commission can initiate legal action.

A judgment by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) declaring a Member State's action to be incompatible with EU law is purely declaratory. This means it doesn't automatically annul the conflicting national measures or impose sanctions.

The ECJ does not have the power to annul national measures found to be incompatible with EU law. This is a separate action that needs to be taken by the Member State itself.

The ECJ does not have the authority to directly impose fines on a Member State for breaching EU law. It can only declare the breach and requires the Member State to take measures to rectify the situation.

If the ECJ declares that a Member State has breached EU law, Article 260.1 TFEU compels the Member State to take necessary measures to comply with the judgment. This includes removing any conflicting national rules using laws of equivalent force and identifying the modalities of compliance.

This is a way to pressure Member States to comply with EU law. It involves the Commission bringing a case before the Court of Justice if a Member State fails to comply with a previous judgment.

The Court can impose a financial penalty on a Member State that doesn't comply with a previous judgment. This is a way to deter future non-compliance.

The Lisbon Treaty made the second infringement procedure more effective by streamlining the process. This means it's now quicker and easier to enforce compliance.

The Commission can now refer a matter to the Court directly after a Member State has a chance to respond, without waiting for a reasoned opinion or an expiration period. This accelerates the procedure.

The Court's first ruling in the infringement procedure is a declaratory judgment which simply states that a Member State has violated EU law. This judgment can be less effective at deterring future violations.

If a Member State does not comply with a previous judgment, the Commission can initiate a second infringement proceeding against them. This might lead to a second declaratory judgment or a financial penalty.

The Commission can propose a specific amount of financial penalty to the Court in the second infringement procedure. The Court can then decide whether to impose the penalty.

The second infringement procedure is designed to increase the deterrent effect of EU law by making it more likely that Member States will comply with EU law.