Court of Justice of the European Union

Court ofJusticeoftheEuropean Union Unit 27

Preview • EU institutions • Composition of ECJ • Jurisdiction • Procedure • ECJ in the EU legal order

EU Institutions • The European Commission • The European Parliament • The Council of the European Union • The European Court of Justice • The European Court of Auditors

ECJ • Since the establishment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in 1952, its mission has been to ensure that "the law is observed" "in the interpretation and application" of the Treaties.

Mission • As part of that mission, the Court of Justice of the European Union: • reviews the legality of the acts of the institutions of the European Union, • ensures that the Member States comply with obligations under the Treaties, and • interprets European Union law at the request of the national courts and tribunals.

Themainfunction • The Court constitutes the judicial authority of the European Union and, in cooperation with the courts and tribunals of the Member States, it ensures the uniform application and interpretation of EU law.

Composition • The Court of Justice of the European Union, which has its seat in Luxembourg, consists of 3 courts: • Court of Justice, • General Court (created in 1988) • Civil Service Tribunal (created in 2004). • Since their establishment, approximately 28000 judgments have been delivered by the three courts.

Compositionof ECJ • 28 Judges and 9 Advocates General • Judges and Advocates General - appointed bythe governments of the Member States after consultation of a panel responsible for giving an opinion on prospective candidates' suitability to perform the duties concerned. • appointed for a term of office of 6 years, which is renewable.

Judges • Chosen from among individuals whose independence is beyond doubt and who posses the qualifications required for appointmentto the highest judicial officesin their respective countries, or who are of recognized competence

President • The Judges elect one of themselves as President for a renewable term of three years. • The President directs the work of the Court and presides at hearings and deliberations of the full Court or the Grand Chamber.

Advocates General • - assist the Court • - responsible for presenting, with complete impartiality and independence, an opinion in the cases assigned to them

Composition • Full court • Grand Chamber of 13 Judges • Chambers of 3 or 5 Judges

Full court • in cases prescribed by the Statute of the Court (e.g. proceedings to dismiss the European Ombudsman or a Member of the European Commission) • where the Court considers that a case is of exceptional importance

Grand Chamber • when a Member State or an institution which is a party to the proceedings so requests • in particularly complex or important cases

Chambers • Other cases: heard by Chambers of 3 or 5 Judges

Typesof procedure • 1. References for preliminary rulings • 2. Direct actions • 2.1.Actions for failure to fulfil obligations • 2.2.Actions for annulment • 2.3.Actions for failure to act • 3. Appeals • 4. Reviews

References for preliminaryrulings • ECJ cooperates with all the courts of the Member States • To ensure the effective and uniform application of EU legislation and to prevent divergent interpretations, national courts refer to the ECJ and ask it to clarify a point concerning the interpretation of EU law, so that they may ascertainwhether their national legislation complies with that law

References for preliminaryrulings • ECJ's reply - not merely an opinion; takes the form of a judgment or reasoned order • The national court to which it is addressed - bound by the interpretation given • The Court's judgment likewise binds other national courts before which the same problem is raised

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations • - enable the Court of Justice to determine whether a Member State has fulfilled its obligations under European Union law. • Before bringing the case before the Court of Justice, the Commission conducts a preliminary procedure in which the Member State concerned is given the opportunity to reply to the complaints addressed to it. • If that procedure does not result in the Member State terminating the failure, an action for infringement of EU law may be brought before the Court of Justice.

Actions for failure to fulfil obligations • Action may be brought by the Commission or by a Member State. • If the Court finds that an obligation has not been fulfilled, the State must bring the failure to an end without delay. • If ECJ finds that the Member State concerned has not complied with its judgment, it may impose on it a fixed or periodic financial penalty

Actions for annulment • Applicant seeks annulment of a measure (e.g. a regulation, directive or decision) adopted by an institution, body, office or agency of the EU • ECJ- exclusive jurisdiction over actions brought by a Member State against the European Parliament and/or against the Council or brought by one EU institution against another

Actions for failure to act • These actions enable the lawfulness of the failure of the institutions, bodies, offices or agencies of the EUto act to be reviewed. • Such an action may be brought only after the institution concerned has been called on to act. • Where the failure to act is held to be unlawful, it is for the institution concerned to put an end to the failure by appropriate measures. Jurisdiction to hear actions for failure to act is shared between the Court of Justice and the General Court according to the same criteria as for actions for annulment.

Appeals • Appeals on points of law only may be brought before the ECJ against judgments and orders of the General Court. • If the appeal is admissible and well founded, the ECJ sets aside the judgment of the General Court.

Appeals • Where the state of the proceedings so permits, the ECJ may decide the case. • Otherwise, it refers the case back to the General Court, which is bound by the decision of the ECJ on the appeal

Reviews • Decisions of the General Court on appeals against decisions of the Civil Service Tribunal maybe reviewed by the ECJ as provided in the Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the EU

Judgments • Judges deliberate on the basis of a draft judgment drawn up by the Judge-Rapporteur • Each Judge of the formation concerned may propose changes • Decisions of the ECJ are taken by majority; no record made public of any dissenting opinions

Judgements • Judgments are signed by all the Judges who took part in the deliberation and pronounced in open court. • Judgments and the Opinions of the Advocates General are available on the CURIA Internet site on the day they are delivered (www.curia.europa.eu) • In most cases, subsequently published in the ECJ Reports.

Thecostsofproceedings • No court fees for proceedings before the CJ • The Court does not meet the fees and expenses of lawyers by whom the parties must be represented. • A party unable to meet all or part of the costs mayapply for legal aid • Application must be accompanied byevidence establishing the party's lack of means

Multilingualism

Languagearrangements • In direct actions, the language used in the application (which may be one of the 24 official languages of the EU) will be the ‘language of the case'. • References for preliminary rulings: the language of the case is that of the national court which made the reference to the ECJ

Languagearrangements • Oral proceedings at hearings are interpreted simultaneouslyinto official languages of the EU • The Judges deliberate, without interpreters, in a common language which, traditionally, is French.

Fundamental principles established by case-law • In its case-law (starting with Van Gend & Loos in 1963), ECJ introduced the principle of the direct effect of Community law in the Member States, which now enables European citizens to rely directly on rules of EU law before their national courts

Van Gend & Loos • The transport company Van Gend & Loos had imported goods from Germany to the Netherlands • had to pay customs duties which it considered to be incompatible with the rule in the EEC Treaty prohibiting increases in customs duties in trade between Member States

Van Gend & Loos • Conflict between national legislation and the provisions of the EEC Treaty • The Court decided the question referred by a Netherlands court by stating the doctrine of direct effect, conferring on the transport company a direct guarantee of its rights under Community law before the national court

Van Gend & Loos • “The Community constitutes a new legal order of international law for the benefit of which the States have limited their sovereign rights, albeit within limited fields, and the subjects of which comprise not only member states but also their nationals. Independently of the legislation of member states, Community Law therefore not only imposes obligations on individuals but is also intended to confer upon them rights which become part of their legal heritage”

Fundamental principles established by case-law • In 1964, the Costa judgment established the primacy of Community law over domestic law

Costa v. Enel • An Italian court asked the ECJ whether the Italian law on nationalisation of the production and distribution of electrical energy was compatible with certain rules in the EEC Treaty • ECJ introduced the doctrine of the primacy of Community law, basing it on the specific nature of the Community legal order, which is to be uniformly applied in all the Member States

Costa v. Enel • By creating a Community of unlimited duration, having its own institutions, its own personality, its own legal capacity and capacity of representation on an international plane and, more particularly, real powers stemming from a limitation of sovereignty or a transfer of powers from the states of the Community, the Member States have limited their sovereign rights, albeit within limited fields, and have thus created a body of law which binds both their nationals and themselves...

Costa v. Enel • “The law stemming from the Treaty, an independent source of law, cannot because of its very nature be overridden by rules of national law, however framed, without being deprived of its character as community law and without the legal basis of the Community itself being called in question”

Fundamental principles established by case-law • In 1991, in Francovich and Others, the Court developed another fundamental concept, the liability of a Member State to individuals for damage caused to them by a breach of Community law by that State. • Since 1991, European citizens have been able to bring an action for damages against a State which infringes a Community rule

Francovich and Others v. Italian Republic • Two Italian citizens who were owed pay by their insolvent employers had brought actions for a declaration that the Italian State had failed to transpose Community provisions protecting employees in the event of their employers' insolvency

Francovich and Others v. Italian Republic • On a reference from an Italian court, the Court stated that the directive in question was designed to confer on individuals rights which they had been denied as a result of the failure to act of the State which had not implemented the directive. • The Court thus opened up the possibility of an action for damages against the State itself

FreeMovementofGoods • Since the Cassis de Dijon judgment (1979) on the principle of free movement of goods, traders can import into their country any product coming from another EU country, provided that it was lawfully manufactured and marketed and that there is no overriding reason relatingto the protection of health or the environment to prevent its importation into the country of consumption

Free movement of persons • Bosman (1995) -the Court gave a ruling on a reference from a Belgian court on the compatibility of rules of football federations with freedom of movement of workers • It stated that professional sport is an economic activity whose exercise may not be hindered by rules governing the transfer of players or restricting the number of players who are nationals of other Member States

Freedom to provide services • A judgment of 1989 on freedom to provide services concerned a British tourist who was assaulted and seriously injured in the Paris metro

Freedom to provide services • On a reference from a French court, the Court held that, as a tourist, he was the recipient of services outside his country and was covered by the Community law principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality • He was therefore entitled to the same compensation as a French national could claim (Cowan)

Freedom to provide services • In cases referred by the Luxembourg courts, the Court declared that national provisions having the effect that an ensured person cannot obtain reimbursement of the cost of dental treatment on the ground that it was given in another Member State constitute an unjustified restriction on freedom to provide services (Kohll, 1998), and that refusal to reimburse costs related to the purchase of spectacles abroad is regarded as an unjustified restriction on free movement of goods (Decker, 1998).

Equal treatment and social rights • An air hostess brought an action against her employer on the grounds of discrimination in the pay she received compared with her male colleagues who did the same work. • On a reference from a Belgian court, the Court held in 1976 that the Treaty rule requiring equal pay for men and women for equal work had direct effect (Defrenne).

Equal treatment and social rights • In its interpretation of the Community rules on equal treatment for men and women, the Court has played a part in protecting women against dismissal linked to pregnancy. • A woman who was unable to continue work because of difficulties connected with her pregnancy was dismissed.

Equal treatment and social rights • In 1998, the Court held that that dismissal was contrary to Community law. • Dismissal of a woman during pregnancy for absences linked to pregnancy-related illness is unlawful discrimination on grounds of sex (Brown).

Court of Justice of the European Union