Podcast
Questions and Answers
Which category of applicants has an automatic right to bring judicial review proceedings?
Which category of applicants has an automatic right to bring judicial review proceedings?
What test did the European Court of Justice (ECJ) originally apply to non-privileged applicants in the Plaumann case?
What test did the European Court of Justice (ECJ) originally apply to non-privileged applicants in the Plaumann case?
In which case did the ECJ hold that having a trademark provided sufficient standing?
In which case did the ECJ hold that having a trademark provided sufficient standing?
What was one of the critiques regarding the Plaumann test?
What was one of the critiques regarding the Plaumann test?
Signup and view all the answers
Who among the following could be classified as semi-privileged applicants?
Who among the following could be classified as semi-privileged applicants?
Signup and view all the answers
What requirement must non-privileged applicants satisfy according to the initial standing test?
What requirement must non-privileged applicants satisfy according to the initial standing test?
Signup and view all the answers
Which case indicated that individuals with legally binding contracts might have sufficient standing?
Which case indicated that individuals with legally binding contracts might have sufficient standing?
Signup and view all the answers
What did Advocate General Jacobs suggest regarding the rules on standing?
What did Advocate General Jacobs suggest regarding the rules on standing?
Signup and view all the answers
What is required for a non-privileged applicant to have standing under Article 263(4)?
What is required for a non-privileged applicant to have standing under Article 263(4)?
Signup and view all the answers
How did the courts interpret the concept of an implementing measure in the Sugar Cartel case?
How did the courts interpret the concept of an implementing measure in the Sugar Cartel case?
Signup and view all the answers
What was a significant limitation regarding the standing of non-privileged applicants post-Lisbon Treaty?
What was a significant limitation regarding the standing of non-privileged applicants post-Lisbon Treaty?
Signup and view all the answers
What is one key characteristic of the Plaumann test?
What is one key characteristic of the Plaumann test?
Signup and view all the answers
What did the Inuit case reveal about regulatory acts in relation to Article 263(4)?
What did the Inuit case reveal about regulatory acts in relation to Article 263(4)?
Signup and view all the answers
What was the outcome of the judicial efforts to reform the test for non-privileged applicants in UPA and Jego-Quere?
What was the outcome of the judicial efforts to reform the test for non-privileged applicants in UPA and Jego-Quere?
Signup and view all the answers
What implication does the automatic geographic ban in the Bloufin case have regarding the need for implementing measures?
What implication does the automatic geographic ban in the Bloufin case have regarding the need for implementing measures?
Signup and view all the answers
What is the main reason the courts have interpreted Article 263(4) strictly?
What is the main reason the courts have interpreted Article 263(4) strictly?
Signup and view all the answers
Study Notes
Judicial Review in the EU: Standing Requirements
-
Privileged Applicants: EU institutions and member states have automatic standing for judicial review. Requirements are limited to timeliness and direct concern (cause-and-effect harm, legal interest). Key cases: Piraiki Pitraiki, Front National.
-
Semi-Privileged Applicants: Include the European Central Bank and the Committee of Regions. Standing criteria are less stringent than for non-privileged applicants but more than Privileged applicants.
-
Non-Privileged Applicants: Individuals face a stricter standing test, the Plaumann test. They must demonstrate a special/sufficiently closed class of individuals affected, showing that they are directly affected by the act.
The Plaumann Test and its Criticisms
-
Initial Ruling: In Plaumann, clementine exporters lacked standing because they weren't a sufficiently closed class of traders. This ruling made the test restrictive.
-
Subsequent Applications (Pre-Lisbon): This test was applied in Piraiki Pitraiki, limiting standing for Greek Cotton Exporters, unless a legally binding contract existed prior to the decision. The test was also highlighted in Toepher.
-
Exceptions and Distinctions: In Codorniu, a trademark provided standing, distinguishing it from Plaumann. The Court distinguished cases where legal agreements or specific rights applied.
Attempts to Ease the Test (Pre-Lisbon)
-
Advocates General: Advocate General Jacobs in Union de Pequenos argued for a softer test based on a person's adversely affected legal interest, echoed in Jego-Quere SA.
-
Court's Response: However, the courts ultimately favoured application of the Plaumann test despite these arguments
Lisbon Treaty and Article 263(4)
-
Aim: The Lisbon Treaty aimed to lower standing requirements for non-privileged applicants regarding regulatory acts not needing implementing measures. The applicants only needing to show that the act was directly concerning.
-
Strict Interpretation: The courts have interpreted Article 263(4) narrowly.
-
Inuit Case: The Inuit case illustrated this strict interpretation, keeping the high Plaumann test threshold.
-
Sugar Cartel: This ruling showed that acts needing any kind of implementing step, even a mechanical requirement, triggers the implementing measure criterion, requiring applicants to satisfy the higher standard.
-
Bloufin and Telefonica Cases: These rulings reinforced that the simpler direct impact test only applies to specific regulatory acts without implementing measures, anything else requiring the more restrictive Plaumann test.
Overall Conclusion
- Difficult Standing for Non-Privileged Applicants: Despite Lisbon Treaty changes, the Plaumann test remains a significant obstacle, requiring a high threshold for standing.
- Limited impact of Article 263(4): The criteria for applicability of (4) are narrow, and it is rare that EU regulations do not require implementing measures. This limits its practical effect on standing for non-privileged individuals.
Studying That Suits You
Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.
Description
This quiz explores the standing requirements for judicial review in the European Union. It covers the distinctions among privileged, semi-privileged, and non-privileged applicants, including the complexities of the Plaumann test and its impact on legal standing. Understand the implications of key cases that shape this area of EU law.
