CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS: I. COMMUNITY COURTS IN THE AREA OF JUDICIAL COOPERATION

2005 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 489-497 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruno Nascmbene
Keyword(s):  
The European Union ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Community Law ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons ◽  
Treaty Of Amsterdam ◽  
Community Courts

A. The area of freedom, security and justice and the role of the Court of JusticeOne of the subjects which has aroused particular interest in the study of the ‘area of freedom, security and justice’ introduced by the Treaty of Amsterdam as an objective of the European Union (EU) inherent in the principle of the free movement of persons (see the preamble to, and Article 2, the Treaty on EU) is the role of the European Court of Justice (Court). The interest is both theoretical and practical, because one of the main issues is the Court's jurisdiction to give preliminary rulings and thus relations between national and Community courts and the protection of the interests of individuals before national courts wherever there is a conflict between national and Community law and thus a question of interpretation of Community law arises in national proceedings. The Treaty of Nice, which came into force on 1 February 2003, altered the jurisdiction and organisation of the Community judicature and therefore affected the ‘area of freedom, security and justice’.1

The preliminary ruling procedure at the court of justice of the European Union and transformation of European anti-discrimination law

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (3) ◽  
pp. 66-72
Author(s):  
Elena Sorokina
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Essential Feature ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Eu

The preliminary ruling procedure is an essential feature of the EU legal system, which is a unique cooperation tool as part of the dialogue between the Court of Justice of the EU and national courts of the Member States. Its main purpose is to ensure uniform interpretation and application of the provisions of EU law with all Member States and to preserve the uniformity of the European legal system. The continuous use by national courts of the Member States of the mechanism of preliminary ruling and constructive inter-judicial cooperation, the Court of Justice has developed an extremely extensive case law on the prohibition of discrimination and with the result to introduce substantial changes in European anti-discrimination law.The preliminary rulings of the Court of Justice have shown its inclination to expand notions of what constitutes discrimination and in most cases the Court prompt by the desire to interpret the provisions of European law so as to ensure the full effectiveness of the law, as well as a willingness to promote and strengthen protection against discrimination in Europe. While the protection against discrimination on some grounds is stronger than others, however, the preliminary rulings of the Court of Justice are important contribution to the transformation of anti-discrimination law, promote change in the national legislation of the Member States and provide the more effective protection of human rights in general.

scholarly journals Judicial Cooperation in Environmental Matters: Mapping National Courts’ Behaviour in Follow-up Cases

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 147-170
Author(s):  
Lorenzo Squintani ◽  
Dionne Annink
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Willingness To Cooperate ◽  
Large Corpus

The need to ensure a uniform interpretation and effective application of the large corpus of EU environmental regulation in the jurisdictions of the Member States remains a task of pivotal importance for the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). A quick look at the CURIA database reveals that many judgments are handed down every year to clarify the meaning of EU environmental provisions. It is therefore important to study the proper functioning of the tandem composed of the CJEU and the national courts in this field of EU law. In that sense, this article responds to Bogojević’s call ‘to draw a grander map of judicial dialogues initiated across various Member States’. More specifically, the topic investigated by this article is how Dutch courts have followed up on responses received from the CJEU to their preliminary reference requests in the field of EU environmental law, until January 2017. Almost all the cases we have retrieved from the Netherlands show various degrees of willingness to cooperate with the CJEU. This article highlights the existence of three trends: full cooperation, gapped cooperation and withdrawn cooperation.

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?

‘What Has It Got to Do Necessarily with the European Union?’: International Family Law and European (Economic) Integration

2007 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 329-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johan Meeusen
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Economic Integration ◽  
Family Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Cooperation ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
European Community Law

Family law has long been considered a domain which virtually escaped any impact from European Community law. Insofar as European cooperation was aimed at economic integration in the context of the EEC, the arguments in favour of keeping it that way seemed obvious and convincing. Today, the relationship between European law and (international) family law is often viewed in an entirely different way. The explanation for this shift lies in the broad, functional approach adopted by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to the free movement of persons in the European Union, as well as in the transformation of the Community from the EEC into the EC and its incorporation into a ‘European Union’ (EU) not exclusively oriented towards economic integration.

The European Court of Justice, More than a Teleological Court

1999 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 373-398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Albertina Albors Llorens
Keyword(s):  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Common Denominator ◽  
Community Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Legal Texts ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Common ◽  
Ec Law

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.

Comparative Law and the Europeanization of Private Law

2006 ◽  
pp. 538-578 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reinhard Zimmermann
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Future Trends ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Third ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Do So

The gradual emergence of a European private law is one of the most significant contemporary legal developments. Comparative law scholarship has played an important role in this process and will continue to do so. This article discusses the Europeanization of private law as a new and challenging task for comparative law. The second section considers the Europeanization of private law, describing the creation of the European Union and the role of the European Court of Justice. The third section discusses European legal scholarship. The fourth section cites the contributions of comparative law. The last two sections discuss current and future trends for the European private law.

scholarly journals The Political Role of the European Court of Justice: How the EU Institutional Thresholds Shield the Integrationist Power of the Court

2019 ◽  
pp. 195-212
Author(s):  
Roberto Reyes Izquierdo
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Legislative Process ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Political Role ◽  
Fundamental Factor ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Eu

The aim of this paper is to analyse how the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has been a fundamental factor in the integration process of the European Union, in spite of the obstacles posed by the intergovernmental dynamics that have traditionally hindered the construction of a stronger, cohesive and more integrated Europe. Important principles such as direct effect or supremacy of EU law have been developed through ECJ rulings and case law, even when such principles were not literally foreseen in the foundational Treaties. Therefore, this paper argues that the role and power of the Court as an “indirect law-maker” have been essential for the construction of the European Union, and this has been possible due to the complexities and weaknesses of the legislative process involving the three main decision-makers: the Commission, the Council of the EU, and the European Parliament.

scholarly journals THE FUTURE OF EUROPEAN ARREST WARRANT IN LIGHT OF DECISION THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE IN THE CASE ARANYOSI AND CALDARARU

TEME ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 631
Author(s):  
Aleksandar Mićo Bošković ◽  
Tomislav Trajković ◽  
Gordana Nikolić
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Dominant Form ◽  
Arrest Warrant ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
European Arrest Warrant

For a long time, extradition has been a dominant form of international mutual legal assistance, but in many cases it has proven to be an insufficiently efficient instrument. Having that in mind, on the territory of the European Union, a European arrest warrant has been established as an institute that should contribute to the effectiveness of combating modern crime and facilitate the surrender of persons between member states in order to effectively prevent the escape of suspects or convicted persons. Regarding this, the Article will first give a brief overview of the Council of the European Union Framework Decision, which regulates the European arrest warrant, and will analyze it in order to define the strengths and weaknesses of the task itself. The subject of research in this article is primarily devoted to the analysis of the judgment of the European Court of Justice in the “Aranyosi and Caldararu” case. With this verdict, the European Court of Justice, derogates some of the key principles that order is based on and special attention is devoted to the devaluation of the principles of mutual trust and the principles of mutual recognition of judicial decisions among EU states, which the Council of the European Union considers as the cornerstone of judicial cooperation.

scholarly journals The Euro Group’s Informality and locus standi before the European Court of Justice: Council v. K. Chrysostomides & Co. and Others

2021 ◽  
Vol 81 (4) ◽  
pp. 917-936
Author(s):  
Giacomo Rugge
Keyword(s):  
Legal Protection ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Economic ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Economic Constitution ◽  
Judicial Proceedings

This article provides an analysis of the recent European Court of Justice’s (ECJ) judgment in Council v. K. Chrysostomides & Co. and Others. After the Cypriot financial and banking crisis of 2012-13, the case raised the issue as to whether the Euro Group could be considered as an ‘institution’ for the purposes of non-contractual liability under Art. 340 para. 2 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The Court replied in the negative, offering a set of arguments on the nature and role of the Euro Group within the European economic constitution and on the legal protection of individuals vis-à-vis austerity measures. The article summarises and criticises those arguments, showing how this judgment of the Court has made the Euro Group essentially immune against judicial proceedings, despite its pivotal role in the management of European economic and monetary issues.

Natura 2000: deterioro, desclasificación de lugares de importancia comunitaria y derecho de propiedad

2014 ◽  
pp. 1543-1561
Author(s):  
Agustín GARCÍA URETA
Keyword(s):  
Natura 2000 ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Habitats Directive ◽  
Private Ownership ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Conservation Areas ◽  
Locus Standi ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court

LABURPENA: Lan honek, Europar Batasuneko habitatei buruzko Zuzentarauaren eta Justizia Auzitegiaren gaiari buruzko doktrinaren pean, garrantzi erkideko lekuei ken dakiekeen sailkapena aztertzen du. Iruzkinak Auzitegiak onartutako fokatzeari kritikak egiten dizkio, bereziki, Cascina uzian, balizkotasun hura onartzen baitu, Zuzentarauaren hitzez hitzekoak kontserbazio bereziko guneak bakarrik aipatu arren. Agerian jartzen dira baita ere beste alderdi batzuekiko Auzitegiaren jarrerak dakarren sendotasunik eza, besteak beste, kontserbazio bereziko gune izendatu aurretik garrantzi erkideko lekuen babesarekiko eta garrantzi erkideko lekuen behin betiko zerrenda onartzen duen Batzordearen erabakia aurkaratzeko legitimazioarekiko. Azkenik, garrantzi erkideko leku bati sailkapena kentzen zaionean jabetza-eskubideak duen papera ere aztertzen da. RESUMEN: Este trabajo examina la posible desclasificación de los lugares de importancia comunitaria (LIC) bajo la Directiva de hábitats de la Unión Europea y la doctrina del Tribunal de Justicia a este respecto. El comentario plantea una serie de críticas al enfoque adoptado por el Tribunal, en particular en el asunto Cascina, en el que se acepta tal eventualidad a pesar del tenor literal de la Directiva, que solo se refiere a las zonas de especial conservación (ZEC). También se ponen en evidencia las inconsistencias que plantea la postura del Tribunal con otros aspectos, tales como la protección de los LIC antes de designarse como ZEC y la legitimación para recurrir la decisión de la Comisión que aprueba la lista definitiva de LIC. Finalmente, se examina el papel del derecho de propiedad en el caso de la desclasificación de un LIC. ABSTRACT: This contribution examines the declassification of sites of community importance (SCIs) under the European Union Habitats Directive and the case law of the European Court of Justice. The comment criticizes the approach adopted by the Court, in particular in the Cascina case, which admits that possibility despite the Directive’s express wording that only refers to special conservation areas (SCAs). The comment also highlights other inconsistencies derived from the case law such as the provisional protection of SCIs before being designated as SCAs and the locus standi to challenge the Commission’s decision adopting the definitive list of SCIs so far rejected by the Court. The comment also examines the role of private ownership in the declassification procedure.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document