The Role of the European Court of Justice in the Field of Common Foreign and Security Policy After the Treaty of Lisbon: New Challenges for the Future

Author(s):  
Maja Brkan
2006 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria-Gisella Garbagnati Ketvel

The purpose of this article is to consider the scope of the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in the field of the Common Foreign and Security Policy, as set out in the Treaty on European Union. Pursuant to Article 46 TEU, the ECJ has virtually no competence over foreign policy and security matters—although some limited scope for judicial supervision may be derived from the combined effect of this provision with Article 47 TEU, which prevents encroachment by EU law on Community competence, with respect both to reviewing the choice of legal basis and to determining any violations of EC policy-making procedures. It is submitted that the absence of judicial control over the exercise of powers by the Union and its Member States in this area of potentially sensitive action does not guarantee the preservation of the institutional balance established by the EU Treaty. It may also prove incompatible for individuals to have a legal remedy in the event of a breach of directly effective CFSP provisions.


Author(s):  
Morten Broberg ◽  
Niels Fenger

Chapter 4 examines which questions can be referred for a preliminary ruling. The European Court of Justice has jurisdiction to give preliminary rulings on the interpretation of the Treaties, and on the validity and interpretation of acts of the institutions, bodies, offices, or agencies of the Union. It does not have jurisdiction to rule on the interpretation or validity of international law or national laws, and it is prevented from giving a binding ruling on the facts that are put before a national court. Chapter 4 explains the reference to ‘the Treaties’ as well as the meanings of ‘acts’, ‘institutions, bodies, offices or agencies’, and ‘validity’. This examination includes police and judicial cooperation, common foreign and security policy, the Euratom Treaty and the ECSC Treaty, and it includes preliminary references concerning international agreements. The chapter also examines the extent to which the Court of Justice can give its opinion on the facts or the content of national law in connection with a reference for a preliminary ruling or on questions that concern circumstances that arise before a Member State’s accession to the European Union or where the preliminary ruling is rendered after a Member State’s withdrawal from the Union (eg Brexit).


2004 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 1-34
Author(s):  
Anthony Arnull

The purpose of this article is to consider the effect of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe on the European Court of Justice (ECJ). At the time of writing, the future of the draft Constitution is somewhat uncertain. Having been finalised by the Convention on the Future of Europe in the summer of 2003 and submitted to the then President of the European Council, it formed the basis for discussion at an intergovernmental conference (IGC) which opened in October 2003. Hopes that the text might be finalised by the end of the year were dashed when a meeting of the IGC in Brussels in December 2003 ended prematurely amid disagreement over the weighting of votes in the Council. However, it seems likely that a treaty equipping the European Union with a Constitution based on the Convention’s draft will in due course be adopted and that the provisions of the draft dealing with the ECJ will not be changed significantly. Even if either assumption proves misplaced, those provisions will remain of interest as reflecting one view of the position the ECJ might occupy in a constitutional order of the Union.


Author(s):  
Miryam Rodríguez-Izquierdo Serrano

Este artículo propone un análisis sistemático de la posición de las sentencias del Tribunal de Justicia en el sistema constitucional de fuentes. El análisis parte de dos premisas: la primera es la de que los órdenes normativos supranacional y estatal tienen autonomía formal, pero no material; la segunda es que la integración del Derecho de la Unión en el ordenamiento estatal no puede explicarse sin la jurisprudencia del Tribunal de Justicia. Se describen los efectos de las sentencias del juez europeo en el orden supranacional, para luego ver cómo se transfieren al sistema de fuentes estatal, teniendo en cuenta la función integradora de la Constitución tanto en el plano interior como en el exterior.This article is a review of the different kind of rulings made by the European Court of Justice, in order to find their function and position in the Spanish Law system. The analysis is made under two assumptions: the first one about the formal autonomy but material dependency between EU and Spanish law systems; the second one is that the European Court of Justice case law rules over the interaction between both systems. Formal and substantive effects of ECJ rulings over both systems are described and analysed, considering the integrating role of the Spanish Constitution.


1999 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 373-398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Albertina Albors Llorens

The judgments of the Community judicature are often subject to intense scrutiny by the media and by academic writers. The European Court of Justice, in particular, is regularly accused of being by and large an “activist” court, namely a court that construes EC law in the light of the objective the judges are trying to pursue. In particular, it is argued that the European Court uses the teleological method of interpretation to enhance the effectiveness of Community law at the expense of the written legal texts. Several studies have been published on the supposed “activist” role of the European Court and as many (or more) have been written in defence of the Court. The common denominator of all these works is that they are selective.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document