CJEU Lecture Slides for Week 16 PDF

12 June 2023 Dr. Michael DE BOECK THE CJEU: ORGANISATION, ACTIONS, PROCEDURES & PRELIMINARY REFERENCE PROCEDURE Week 16  You will have a general overview of the composition and functioning o...

12 June 2023 Dr. Michael DE BOECK THE CJEU: ORGANISATION, ACTIONS, PROCEDURES & PRELIMINARY REFERENCE PROCEDURE Week 16  You will have a general overview of the composition and functioning of the CJEU You will be able to explain what actions can be brought before the Court You will be able to explain the purpose and phases of the proceedings under art. 267 TFEU as well as to apply its conditions By the end of today’s lecture short title presentation - customize via footnote 2  Outline 3 short title presentation - customize via footnote  I. The CJEU: functions and organisation short title presentation - customize via footnote 4 Article 19 TEU See also art. 251 TFEU et seq., Protocol no 3 on the Statute of the CJEU and Rules of Procedure short title presentation - customize via footnote 5 The functions of the Court Interpreting the law through preliminary rulings Interpreting In its recent Judgment Case C-122/21 (Get Fresh Cosmetics), the Court has found that Member States may restrict the distribution of effervescent bath bombs that look like foodstuffs as they may cause health risks Enforcing the law through infringement proceedings Enforcing In its judgement in Case C-791/19 R (Commission v Poland), the Court ordered Poland to immediately suspend the application of the national provisions on the powers of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court Annulling EU legal acts through actions for annulment Annulling In its recent judgement in Case C-401/19 (Poland v. Parliament and Council), the Court has found that article 17 of the copyright directive does not infringe freedom of expression and information Ensuring the EU takes action through actions for failure to act Ensuring In Case 657/21 (Parliament v Commission), the Court needs to decide whether the European Commission failed to apply Regulation 2020/2092 (the Conditionality Regulation) Sanctioning EU institutions through actions for damages Sanctioning In Case T-610/19 (Deutsche Telekom v Commission), the General Court has awarded Deutsche Telekom compensation in the amount of approximately € 1.8 million for the harm which it suffered as a result of the European Commission’s refusal to pay it default interest on the amount of the fine which it had unduly paid for an infringement of competition rules short title presentation - customize via footnote 6  The CJEU None at present. Specialised Formerly, the Civil Service Tribunal courts dissolved in 2016 (Regulation 2015/2422) Formerly, Court of The General First Instace Composition: tbd by Court the Statute of the Court; at present, 2 judges/MS Court of Composition: 1 Justice judge/MS + 11 Ags short title presentation - customize via footnote 7  Appointed by common cccord of the governments of the member states AGs make, in open After consultation of a panel of experts (art. 255 TFEU) court, reasoned submissions on cases Independent which require his involvement (art. 252 Qualifications TFEU) Those required for high judicial office in their country (GC) Those required for the highest judicial office in their country OR jurisconsults of recognised competence (CJ) Elected for a period of 6 years (and can be reappointed) Partial renewals every 3 years Appointment Removal: of judges and Judges and AG’s have tenure. They may be deprived of their office only if, in the unanimous opinion of the Judges and Advocates- AGs General of the Court of Justice, they no longer fulfils the requisite conditions or meets the obligations arising from their office. short title presentation - customize via footnote 8  The language of the case is determined by Organisation the action brought The Court of Justice before the court. The The General Court … … working language of the Court (deliberations) is Has a president, Has a president and vice-president and registrar French registrar Has no AGs, but a Sits as full court, judge may be called grand chamber (15) upon to perform the or in chambers (3 or task 5) Sits in chambers of Requires an uneven 3 or 5 judges, or as number of judges to a single judge; may vote and publishes also sit as full court no dissenting or grand chamber opinions short title presentation - customize via footnote 9  III. Actions and procedures before the CJEU short title presentation - customize via footnote 10  Direct actions Infringement – art. 258 TFEU Action for annulment – art. 263 TFEU Failure to act – art. 265 TFEU Non-contractual liability – art. 268, 340 TFEU Jurisdiction Indirect ations Preliminary ruling – art. 267 TFEU Opinion on international agreement – art. 218(11) TFEU short title presentation - customize via footnote 11  Jurisdiction No jurisdiction: − In principle, in the field of CFSP (art. 275 TFEU) − To review the validity/proportionality of operations carried out by the law enforcement services of a member state or the exercise of member states responsibilities with regard to the maintenance of law and order and safeguarding of internal security (art. 276 TFEU) short title presentation - customize via footnote 12  Distribution of work in the CJEU EU CIVIL NATURAL & EU MEMBER STATES EU COURTS SERVANTS LEGAL PERSONS INSTITUTIONS  All Other  All Other  Annulment  Infringement Reform 2024: 5 exceptions Infringement action and action actions  Annulment action Prior opinion  Prior opinion  Pre- All labour and non  Failure to act  Failure to act Annulment action  Annulment  Annulment and contractual liability against EP, Failure to act liminary  Non-contractual Failure to act and Failure to Disputes involving EU  liability Damages Council, act against EP, actions against Referen Civil Servants Commission Council, EP and/or ces  Damages and ECB Commission Council  Infringement and ECB Civil Service Tribunal General Court (GC) appeal Court of Justice (CJ) Appeal 14 III. Indirect actions – References for a preliminary ruling short title presentation - customize via footnote 15 Article 267 TFEU short title presentation - customize via footnote 16  Who can/must send a question Courts or tribunals of the member states… … but the concept is defined by EU law “in order to determine whether a body making a reference is a ‘court or tribunal’ for the purposes of Article 267 TFEU, which is a question governed by EU law alone, the Court takes account of a number of factors, such as whether the body is established by law, whether it is permanent, whether its jurisdiction is compulsory, whether its procedure is inter partes, whether it applies rules of law and whether it is independent (Cartesio, para. 55). 17 short title presentation - customize via footnote  The duty to refer on courts of last instance “Where any such question is raised in a case pending before a court or tribunal of a Member State against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law, that court or tribunal shall bring the matter before the Court” (art. 267 TFEU) But there are exceptions for questions on interpretation! 18 short title presentation - customize via footnote  CILFIT – Case C-283/81 7. THAT OBLIGATION TO REFER A MATTER TO THE COURT OF JUSTICE IS BASED ON COOPERATION , ESTABLISHED WITH A VIEW TO ENSURING THE PROPER APPLICATION AND UNIFORM INTERPRETATION OF COMMUNITY LAW IN ALL THE MEMBER STATES , BETWEEN NATIONAL COURTS , IN THEIR CAPACITY AS COURTS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE APPLICATION OF COMMUNITY LAW , AND THE COURT OF JUSTICE. MORE PARTICULARLY , THE THIRD PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 177 SEEKS TO PREVENT THE OCCURRENCE WITHIN THE COMMUNITY OF DIVERGENCES IN JUDICIAL DECISIONS ON QUESTIONS OF COMMUNITY LAW. THE SCOPE OF THAT OBLIGATION MUST THEREFORE BE ASSESSED , IN VIEW OF THOSE OBJECTIVES , BY REFERENCE TO THE POWERS OF THE NATIONAL COURTS , ON THE ONE HAND , AND THOSE OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE , ON THE OTHER , WHERE SUCH A QUESTION OF INTERPRETATION IS RAISED WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 177. 19 short title presentation - customize via footnote  21 IN THE LIGHT OF ALL THOSE CONSIDERATIONS , THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION SUBMITTED BY THE CORTE SUPREMA DI CASSAZIONE MUST BE THAT THE THIRD PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY IS TO BE INTERPRETED AS MEANING THAT A COURT OR TRIBUNAL AGAINST WHOSE DECISIONS THERE IS NO JUDICIAL REMEDY UNDER NATIONAL LAW IS REQUIRED , WHERE A QUESTION OF COMMUNITY LAW IS RAISED BEFORE IT , TO COMPLY WITH ITS OBLIGATION TO BRING THE MATTER BEFORE THE COURT OF JUSTICE , UNLESS IT HAS ESTABLISHED THAT THE QUESTION RAISED IS IRRELEVANT OR THAT THE COMMUNITY PROVISION IN QUESTION HAS ALREADY BEEN INTERPRETED BY THE COURT OR THAT THE CORRECT APPLICATION OF COMMUNITY LAW IS SO OBVIOUS AS TO LEAVE NO SCOPE FOR ANY REASONABLE DOUBT. THE EXISTENCE OF SUCH A POSSIBILITY MUST BE ASSESSED IN THE LIGHT OF THE SPECIFIC CHARACTERISTICS OF COMMUNITY LAW , THE PARTICULAR DIFFICULTIES TO WHICH ITS INTERPRETATION GIVES RISE AND THE RISK OF DIVERGENCES IN JUDICIAL DECISIONS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. 21 short title presentation - customize via footnote  Attention! Questions on validity of EU law ALWAYS NEED TO BE REFERRED This is because national courts have no jurisdiction themselves to determine the validity of acts of the EU institutions Foto-Frost (C-314/85, paragraph 20) short title presentation - customize via footnote 22 What can be asked ? – Fotofrost Questions on validity or interpretation short title presentation - customize via footnote 23 What can be asked? - Foglia Presumption of validity short title presentation - customize via footnote 24 What can be asked? - Foglia But the Court can look into its own jurisdiction short title presentation - customize via footnote 25 What can be asked? The problem cannot be hypothetical The question must be relevant The question must be clearly articulated The facts must be sufficiently clear short title presentation - customize via footnote 26 What can be asked? Filipiak C-314/08 short title presentation - customize via footnote 27  What can be asked? Bacardi-Martini Case C-318/00. 41 It is settled case-law that it is solely for the national court before which the dispute has been brought, and which must assume responsibility for the subsequent judicial decision, to determine in the light of the particular circumstances of the case both the need for a preliminary ruling in order to enable it to deliver judgment and the relevance of the questions which it submits to the Court. Consequently, where the questions submitted concern the interpretation of Community law, the Court of Justice is, in principle, bound to give a ruling […] 42 However, the Court has also held that, in exceptional circumstances, it can examine the conditions in which the case was referred to it by the national court (see, to that effect, PreussenElektra , paragraph 39). The spirit of cooperation which must prevail in preliminary ruling proceedings requires the national court for its part to have regard to the function entrusted to the Court of Justice, which is to contribute to the administration of justice in the Member States and not to give opinions on general or hypothetical questions […] 43 Thus the Court has held that it has no jurisdiction to give a preliminary ruling on a question submitted by a national court where it is quite obvious that the interpretation or the assessment of the validity of a provision of Community law sought by that court bears no relation to the actual facts of the main action or its purpose, or where the problem is hypothetical, or where the Court does not have before it the factual or legal material necessary to give a useful answer to the questions submitted to it […] 44 In order that the Court may perform its task in accordance with the Treaty, it is essential for national courts to explain, when the reasons do not emerge beyond any doubt from the file, why they consider that a reply to their questions is necessary to enable them to give judgment (Case 244/80 Foglia ECR 3045, paragraph 17). Thus the Court has held that it is essential that the national court should give at the very least some explanation of the reasons for the choice of the Community provisions which it requires to be interpreted and of the link it establishes between those provisions and the national legislation applicable to the dispute […] short title presentation - customize via footnote 28