Competence of the Community to Conclude the New Lugano Convention on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgements in Civil and Commercial Matters: Opinion 1/03 of 7 February 2006

2006 ◽  
Vol 7 (8) ◽  
pp. 705-716 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tristan Baumé
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
Exclusive Or

On March 5, 2003, the Council of the European Union (hereafter the ‘Council’) submitted a request for an opinion to the European Court of Justice pursuant to Article 300 (6) EC. This request was intended to clarify whether the Community had an exclusive or shared competence to conclude a new convention on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters intended to replace the existing Lugano Convention (hereafter the ‘new Lugano Convention’ or the ‘envisaged agreement’).

scholarly journals Croatian public notaries under European Civil Procedure law. A commentary on the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (second chamber) march 9, 2017, case c-551/15 - Pula Parking = Notarios públicos croatas bajo el Derecho Procesal Civil Europeo.Un comentario sobre la sentencia del Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea (sala segunda) 9 de marzo de 2017, asunto c-551/15 - Pula Parking

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 947
Author(s):  
Lucienne Schlürmann
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Main Issue ◽  
Parking Space ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Past ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement

 Abstract: The decision “Pula Parking”, rendered by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on March 9, 2017, deals with the recovery and enforcement of an unpaid debt resulting from the use of a public parking space. The main issue of the case is the question whether a Croatian notary, who is authorized under Croatian law to issue a writ of execution, qualifies as a “court or tribunal” responsible for “deci­sions or judgments” within the meaning of Regulation No 1215/2012 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters**. In the past, the ECJ has never addres­sed this particular issue concerning the interpretation of the Regulation. Consequently, the ruling will serve as a landmark decision for future cases.Keywords: Brussels I bis Regulation, “civil and commercial matters”, term “court”, Croatian pu­blic notary.Resumen: La decisión “Estacionamiento de Pula”, presentada por el Tribunal de Justicia de las Comunidades Europeas (TJUE) el 9 de marzo de 2017, trata de la recuperación y el cumplimiento de una deuda pendiente de pago derivada del uso de un estacionamiento público. La cuestión principal del caso es la cuestión de si un notario croata, autorizado por la legislación croata a emitir un mandamiento de ejecución, califica como un órgano jurisdiccional responsable de “decisiones o sentencias” en el sentido del Reglamento no 1215 / 2012 sobre jurisdicción y reconocimiento y ejecución de resoluciones judiciales en materia civil y mercantil **. En el pasado, el TJCE nunca se ha ocupado de esta cuestión particular relacionada con la interpretación del Reglamento. En consecuencia, el fallo servirá como una decisión histórica para casos futuros.Palabras clave: Reglamento Bruselas I bis, materia civil y mercantile, término “tribunal”, notario público croata.

Fighting for Authority: Strategic Actions of National High Courts in the European Union

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2-2019) ◽  
pp. 419-433
Author(s):  
Stefanie Vedder
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Principal Agent Theory ◽  
Strategic Actions ◽  
High Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Lower Courts

National high courts in the European Union (EU) are constantly challenged: the European Court of Justice (ECJ) claims the authority to declare national standing interpretations invalid should it find them incompatible with its views on EU law. This principle noticeably impairs the formerly undisputed sovereignty of national high courts. In addition, preliminary references empower lower courts to question interpretations established by their national ‘superiors’. Assuming that courts want to protect their own interests, the article presumes that national high courts develop strategies to elude the breach of their standing interpretations. Building on principal-agent theory, the article proposes that national high courts can use the level of (im-) precision in the wording of the ECJ’s judgements to continue applying their own interpretations. The article develops theoretical strategies for national high courts in their struggle for authority.

A Constitutional Court for Europe?

2004 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 1-34
Author(s):  
Anthony Arnull
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
European Council ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Future ◽  
Draft Constitution

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.

6. The preliminary ruling (Article 267 TFEU)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel Foster
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Reference Procedure ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court

This chapter examines the procedural law of the European Union (EU), focusing on Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). It explains that Article 267 is the reference procedure by which courts in member states can endorse questions concerning EU law to the European Court of Justice (CoJ). Under this Article, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has the jurisdiction to provide preliminary rulings on the validity and interpretation of acts of the institutions, bodies, offices, or agencies of the Union and on the interpretation of the Treaties.

Genesis and Development of Legal Protection before Community Courts: A review of Eva Drewes, Entstehen und Entwicklung des Rechtsschutzes vor den Gerichten der Europäischen Gemeinschaften, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin 2000.

2004 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. 741-745
Author(s):  
Timo Tohidipur
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Brute Force ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Sectoral Approach ◽  
Community Courts

The emerging of an early idea, – the idea of a united Europe in peace replacing the destructive force of nationalism – could not have been a proper blueprint for the formation of a European Society until the brute force of the two World Wars prepared the ground for the awareness of political, economical, and social necessities. The first chapter in the book of the European Union regarding this founding idea was written back in 1951/52 by establishing the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) as a Community based upon law. At first, following Jean Monnet's sectoral approach toward integration in connection with the idea of supranationalism, unifying element should have been the supranational administrative body called “High Authority” (former name of the Commission in the first ESCS-Treaty). Given that the ECSC arose on the basis of law, one of the first and most important questions seemed to be the need of legal protection framing and balancing the power of the nearly almighty High Authority. This need should be satisfied by the establishment of a European Court of Justice (ECJ) as a permanent Court in the ECSC-Treaty. Although the shape of the former European Community has been immensely changed and extended through the years of integrational process, the once established ECJ still remains the judicial core in the institutional structure. But how did the system of legal protection react on the defiances of the integrational process?

Ne Bis Interpretatio In Idem?The Two Faces of theNe Bis In IdemPrinciple in the Case Law of the European Court of Justice

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Rosanò
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Antitrust Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Ne Bis In Idem ◽  
Regional Custom

The meaning ofidemin thene bis in idemprinciple is controversial in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. In interpreting the provision of Article 54 of the Convention Implementing the Schengen Agreement, the court has emphasized the necessary requirement in the identity of the material acts while in antitrust law three requirements have been deemed necessary: (1) Identity of the facts, (2) unity of offender, and (3) unity of the legal interest protected. Despite the opinions of some Advocates General, the court has confirmed different interpretations of the same principle, depending on differences of the legal scope in question. A few years ago, however, the European Court of Human Rights proclaimed the criterion based on the identity of the material acts as the most suitable. This might push the Court of Justice of the European Union to correct its position in the antitrust field. Should this happen, this adjustment might serve as grounds to recognize the existence of a regional custom concerning thene bis in idemprinciple.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document