Remedies Before National Courts

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Arnull
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Way

This chapter is concerned with the decentralized enforcement of European Union law, that is, the way in which national courts uphold the rights it confers on litigants. When the Court of Justice established in Van Gend en Loos that Union law was capable of conferring on litigants rights which the national courts were bound to protect, it had written only the first sentence (albeit a very striking one) of a long and complex story that remains unfinished. For while the Court in Van Gend en Loos had enlisted the help of the national courts in ensuring that Union law was observed, it had not made clear how exactly it expected them to discharge that responsibility. The Union legislature might have attempted to resolve the issue systematically and today there is a significant body of Union legislation dealing with the remedies national courts must provide in discrete areas. However, such legislation was slow to develop and remains piecemeal in nature. This has meant that much of the responsibility for fleshing out the remedial obligations of national courts when seeking to uphold rights granted by Union law has fallen to the Court of Justice.

scholarly journals The Court of Justice, the National Courts, and the Controversy over the ‘Ultimate Arbiter’ of the Constitutionality of Law in the European Union

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-41
Author(s):  
Roman Kwiecień
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Space ◽  
The One

The paper addresses the issue of a judicial forum entitled to resolve conflicts between European Union law and national constitutional rules. First and foremost, the issue is discussed under the old primacy/supremacy of EU law controversy. The author seeks to answer whether the national law, including constitutional rules, of a Member State can be ineffective owing to being contradictory to EU law. If so, by whom can national laws be held ineffective? In other words, which of the two judicial fora (national and European) have the last word in these conflicts or who is the ultimate arbiter of the constitutionality of law within the European legal space? The author argues that legal reasoning should reconcile, on the one hand, the specificity of the EU’s unique legal order and effective application of its provisions and, on the other hand, the international legal status of the Member States and their constitutions. This approach leads to the conclusion that there is no ultimate judicial arbiter within the European legal space.

scholarly journals Jurisdiction and applicable law to contracts for the sale of goods and the provision of services including the carriage of goods by sea and other means of transport in the European Union = Jurisdicción y derecho aplicable a los contratos de compraventa de mercaderías y de prestación de servicios incluyendo el transporte de mercancías por vía marítima y otros medios de transporte en la Unión Europea

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 58
Author(s):  
Jonatan Echebarría Fernández
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Contractual Obligation ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Provision Of Services ◽  
Para Determinar

Abstract: The article analyses the jurisdiction and applicable law to contracts for the sale of godos and the provision of services in the European Union. It particularly focuses on contracts that subsume different categories of contracts, such as the carriage of goods by sea, in a contract for the sale of godos and the provision of services. The European Union law and the interpretation provided by the Court of Justice of the European Union shed light into the place of performance of the contract in order to set jurisdiction for national courts. This is explained through the current legal framework and the case law in order to ascertain where and under what legal regime the claimant may start proceedings for the breach of a contractual obligation or in case of a non-contractual claim.Keywords: provision of services, sale of goods, carriage of goods by sea and other means of transport, Court of Justice of the European Union, contractual actions, place of performance of the contractual obligation, non-contractual actions, applicable law, game theory, contractual efficiency.Resumen: El artículo analiza la jurisdicción y la ley aplicable a los contratos para la venta de bienes y la prestación de servicios en la Unión Europea. En particular, se centra en los contratos que subsumen diferentes categorías de contratos, tales como el transporte de mercancías por mar, en un contrato de venta de mercaderías o de prestación de servicios. El Derecho de la Unión Europea y la interpretación dada por el Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea arrojan luz sobre el lugar de cumplimiento del contrato con el fin de establecer el tribunal nacional competente. Esto se explica a través del marco legal actual y casos para determinar dónde y bajo qué régimen legal el demandante puede interponer una demanda por incumplimiento de una obligación contractual o en caso de una reclamación extracontractual.Palabras clave: prestación de servicios, compraventa de mercaderías, transporte de mercancías por vía marítima y otros medios de transporte, Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea, acciones contractuales, lugar de ejecución de la obligación contractual, acciones extracontractuales, derecho aplicable, teoría de juegos, eficiencia contractual.

Review by Constitutional Courts of the Obligation of National Courts of Last Instance to Refer a Preliminary Question to the Court of Justice of the EU

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 1663-1700 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clelia Lacchi
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
Member States ◽  
Constitutional Review ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Judicial Remedy ◽  
The Eu

The Constitutional Courts of a number of Member States exert a constitutional review on the obligation of national courts of last instance to make a reference for a preliminary ruling to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).Pursuant to Article 267(3) TFEU, national courts of last instance, namely courts or tribunals against whose decisions there is no judicial remedy under national law, are required to refer to the CJEU for a preliminary question related to the interpretation of the Treaties or the validity and interpretation of acts of European Union (EU) institutions. The CJEU specified the exceptions to this obligation inCILFIT. Indeed, national courts of last instance have a crucial role according to the devolution to national judges of the task of ensuring, in collaboration with the CJEU, the full application of EU law in all Member States and the judicial protection of individuals’ rights under EU law. With preliminary references as the keystone of the EU judicial system, the cooperation of national judges with the CJEU forms part of the EU constitutional structure in accordance with Article 19(1) TEU.

scholarly journals Characteristics of Precedent: The Case Law of the European Court of Justice in Three Dimensions

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 1073-1098 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mattias Derlén ◽  
Johan Lindholm
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Number Of Factors ◽  
The One

AbstractThe case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) is one of the most important sources of European Union law. However, case law's role in EU law is not uniform. By empirically studying how the Court uses its own case law as a source of law, we explore the correlation between, on the one hand, the characteristics of a CJEU case—type of action, actors involved, and area of law—and, on the other hand, the judgment's “embeddedness” in previous case law and value as a precedent in subsequent cases. Using this approach, we test, confirm, and debunk existing scholarship concerning the role of CJEU case law as a source of EU law. We offer the following conclusions: that CJEU case law cannot be treated as a single entity; that only a limited number of factors reliably affect a judgment's persuasive or precedential power; that the Court's use of its own case law as a source of law is particularly limited in successful infringement proceedings; that case law is particularly important in preliminary references—especially those concerning fundamental freedoms and competition law; and that initiating Member State and the number of observations affects the behavior of the Court.

The Google Ireland Case and the Legal Battle over Digital Taxes in the European Union

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 209-220
Author(s):  
Giulio Allevato ◽  
Fernando Pastor-Merchante
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Digital Economy ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Topical Issue ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Battle ◽  
The Way

The preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Google Ireland case turned on the compatibility with the rules on free movement of some of the administrative arrangements put in place by Hungary in order to administer its controversial advertisement tax (namely, the obligation to register and the penalties attached to the failure to comply with that obligation). The preliminary ruling offers some interesting insights on the way in which the Court assesses the compatibility with the freedom to provide services of national administrative arrangements aimed at ensuring the effective collection of taxes. This is a topical issue in the context of the recent efforts made by Member States to tax the digital economy more effectively.

scholarly journals Determining the moment and form of concluding a passenger transport contract based on the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in joined cases C-349/18 to C-351/18

2020 ◽  
pp. 23-26
Author(s):  
Karol Lange
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Passenger Transport ◽  
Railway Transport ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Railway Systems ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Moment

The article focuses on discussing the norms of Polish transport law and European Union regulations on the correctly defined of the moment and form of concluding a contract of passengers transport in railway systems. The article also describes the problem of discourse between the content of these legal norms and the jurisprudence practice and doctrine opinion. Moreover, was performed to present a comparative analysis of the relation of the Court of justice of the European Union judgment to the norms of Polish and European law and the case law. Commented on the practices of carriers in regulating the said matter. Internal law acts applicable to the means of transport of Polish railway companies were also analyzed. Keywords: Transport law; Contract of passenger transport; European Union law; Railway transport

scholarly journals The multilingual jurisprudence of the Court of Justice and the idea of uniformity in European Union Law

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-138
Author(s):  
Joana Sousa Domingues
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Mother Tongue ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Language Version ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
Binding Force ◽  
Legal Translation ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Official Languages

It is generally accepted that the development of a Union of law is largely due to the judicial decisions of the Court of Justice of the European Union (hereinafter, CJEU). With its judicial pronouncements, the CEJEU aims to achieve the same legal effects in every language version of its judgments and, through them, to ensure the uniform application and interpretation of European Union law. Nevertheless, such judicial pronouncements, with normative and binding force, are the result of collegial decisions and drafted by jurists in a language that is usually nottheir mother tongue. In addition, they are also the result of various permutations associated with the necessary legal translation from and to (and vice versa) the working language of the Court and the official languages of the European Union. The published judgments presented as authentic are, in most cases, translations. To understand the construction of decisions of the CJEU is to understand the construction of the European Union law, and by consequence, the European project itself.

scholarly journals Refl ections on the Principle of Equal Treatment in EU Law and the Jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Convention on Human Rights

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-23
Author(s):  
Marija Daka
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Complex Approach

The paper presents some of the most relevant aspects of European nondiscrimination law established th rough European Union law and the European Convention on Human Rights, looking also at the evolution of the norms and milestones of case-law on equal treatment within the two systems. The paper gives an overview of the non-discrimination concept as interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union and by the European Court of Human Rights. We examine the similar elements but also give insight into conceptual differences between the two human rights regimes when dealing with equal treatment. The differences mainly stem from the more complex approach taken by EU law although, based on analysed norms, cases, and provisions, the aspects of equal treatment in EU law are largely consistent with the practice of the ECtHR. Lastly, the paper briefl y places the European non-discrimination law within the multi-layered human rights system, giving some food for thought for the future potential this concept brings.

Part V Judicial Review before the Court of Justice of the European Union, 3 Decentralized Judicial Review and Enforcement of EU State Aid Rules

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kreuschitz Viktor ◽  
Nehl Hanns Peter
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
State Aid ◽  
Common Market ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Common

This chapter assesses the enforcement of EU State aid rules. The Commission is not the only authority involved in the monitoring of State aid. As regards the supervision of Member States' compliance with their obligations under Articles 107 and 108 TFEU, the national courts also have an important role to play. The implementation of that system of control is a matter for both the Commission and the national courts, their respective roles being complementary but separate. Whilst assessment of the compatibility of aid measures with the common market falls within the exclusive competence of the Commission, subject to review by the Courts of the European Union, it is for national courts to ensure the safeguarding, until the final decision of the Commission, of the rights of individuals faced with a possible breach by State authorities of the prohibition laid down by Article 108(3) TFEU.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document