|
EU
Information >>
EU Institutions >
European Court of Justice |
|
|
|
|
European
Court of Justice
The
European Court of Justice (ECJ), formally known as
the 'Court of Justice of the European Communities', is the
court of the European Union (EU). It is based in
Luxembourg, unlike most of the rest of the European Union
institutions, which are based in Brussels and Strasbourg
The ECJ is the Supreme Court of the European Union in
matters over which it has competency (below), but no
others - EU member states' supreme courts, or equivalent,
are the highest courts in their respective jurisdictions
in all other matters, as each nation state has its own
soverign and different legal and jurisprudence systems.
It adjudicates on matters of interpretation of European
law, most commonly:
- Claims by the European
Commission that a member state has not implemented a
European Union Directive or other legal requirement.
- Claims by member states that
the European Commission has exceeded its authority.
- References from national
courts in the EU member states asking the ECJ questions
about the meaning or validity of a particular piece of
EC law. The Union has many languages and competing
political interests, and so local courts often have
difficulty deciding what a particular piece of
legislation means in any given context. The ECJ will
then give its ruling which is binding on the national
court, to which, the case will be returned to be
disposed of. The ECJ is only permitted to aid in
interpretation of the law, not decide the facts of the
case itself.
Individuals cannot bring cases to the ECJ directly. An
individual who is sufficiently concerned by an act of one
of the institutions of the European Union can challenge
that act in a lower court, called the Court of First
Instance. An appeal on points of law lies against the
decisions of the Court of First Instance to the ECJ.
Employees of the European Commission and other EU
institutions currently sue their employer in the Court of
First Instance. However, a specialist European Union Civil
Service Tribunal was set up in 2005 to deal with these
matters. In addition, the creation of a European Union
Patent Tribunal is currently being examined. |
|
|
|
[
TOP ] |
Organization of the Court of Justice
The
Court of Justice is made up of 25 Judges and 8 Advocates
General. Should the Court so request, the Council of the
European Union may, acting unanimously, increase the
number of Advocates General. The Judges and Advocates
General are appointed by common accord of the governments
of the Member States and hold office for a renewable term
of six years. They are chosen from legal experts whose
independence is 'beyond doubt' and who possess the
qualifications required for appointment to the highest
judicial offices in their respective countries or who are
of recognised competence.
President
The Judges select one of their number to be President of
the Court for a renewable term of three years.He may be
re-elected. He directs the judicial business and the
administration of the Court; he presides at hearings and
deliberations in chambers. He assigns the cases to one of
the chambers for any preparatory inquiries and appoints a
Judge from the chamber to act as rapporteur. He sets the
dates and timetable for the sessions of the Grand Chamber
and of the full Court. The President also personally takes
a decision on requests for the application of interim
measures.
Presidents of the Court
of Justice of the European Communities
Judges
Each member state of the European Union has the power
to nominate one judge, so their number coincides most of
the time with the number of member states. However, as the
ECJ can only sit with an uneven number of judges,
additional judges have been appointed at times when there
was an even number of member states. 5 of the 8 Advocates
General are nominated as of right by the 5 big member
states of the European Union: Germany, France, the United
Kingdom, Italy and Spain. The other 3 positions rotate in
alphabetical order between the 20 smaller member states;
currently (2006), the Netherlands, Austria and Portugal
are thus represented. However, being just a bit smaller
than Spain, Poland has repeatedly requested to be have a
permanent Advocate General.
Advocates
General
Advocates General play a special role within the Court
of Justice. They are neither judge nor prosecutor, yet
they assist with each case and deliver their opinions on
questions.The Advocates-General assist the Court in its
task. They deliver, in open court and with complete
impartiality and independence, opinions in all cases, save
as otherwise decided by the Court where a case does not
raise any new points of law. Their duties should not be
confused with those of a public prosecutor or similar
body.
Although the Advocates General are full members of the
ECJ, it is important to note that they are not judges and
they do not take part in the court's deliberations. It is
the role of the Advocates General to propose to the Court,
in complete independence, a legal solution to the cases
for which they are responsible. The Advocate General’s
Opinion, although often in fact followed, is not binding
on the Court.
Registry
The Court appoints the Registrar for a period of six
years, after which he may be reappointed. He has the same
court duties as the registrar or clerk of a national
court, but he also acts as secretary-general of the
institution. The Court may also appoint one or more
Assistant Registrars. He helps the Court, the Chambers,
the President and the Judges in all their official
functions. He is responsible for the Registry as well as
for the receipt, transmission and custody of documents and
pleadings which have been entered in a register initialled
by the President. He is Guardian of the Seals and is
responsible for the Court's archives and publications. The
Registrar is responsible for the administration of the
Court, its financial management and its accounts, and he
is helped by an administrator.
The operation of the Court is in the hands of officials
and other servants who are responsible to the Registrar
under the authority of the President. The Court
administers its own infrastructure; this includes the
language service, which plays a particularly important
role.
Assistant
Rapporteurs
Assistant Rapporteurs may be appointed by the Council,
on a proposal from the Court, particularly to assist the
President in applications for the adoption of interim
measures and to assist Judge-Rapporteurs in the
performance of their duties. |
|
|
|
[
TOP ] |
|
Plenary sessions and chambers The
Court of Justice may sit as a full Court, in a Grand
Chamber (13 Judges) or in chambers of three or five
Judges. It sits in a Grand Chamber when a Member State or
a Community institution that is a party to the proceedings
so requests, or in particularly complex or important
cases. Other cases are heard by a chamber of three or five
Judges. The Presidents of the chambers of five Judges are
elected for three years, the Presidents of the chambers of
three Judges for one year. The Court sits as a full Court
in the very exceptional cases exhaustively provided for by
the Treaty (for instance, where it must compulsorily
retire the European Ombudsman or a Member of the European
Commission who has failed to fulfil his obligations) and
where the Court considers that a case is of exceptional
importance. The quorum for the full Court is 15. |
|
|
|
[
TOP ] |
|
Jurisdiction
It is the responsibility of the Court of Justice to ensure
that the law is observed in the interpretation and
application of the Treaties establishing the European
Communities and of the provisions laid down by the
competent Community institutions. To enable it to carry
out that task, the Court has wide jurisdiction to hear
various types of action. The Court has competence, inter
alia, to rule on applications for annulment or actions for
failure to act brought by a Member State or an
institution, actions against Member States for failure to
fulfil obligations, references for a preliminary ruling
and appeals against decisions of the Court of First
Instance. |
|
|
|
[
TOP ] |
Forms
of action
Actions for failure to fulfil obligations
Such proceedings enable the Court of Justice to
determine whether a Member State has fulfilled its
obligations under Community law. The commencement of
proceedings before the Court of Justice is preceded by a
preliminary procedure conducted by the Commission, which
gives the Member State the opportunity to reply to the
complaints against it. If that procedure does not result
in termination of the failure by the Member State, an
action for breach of Community law may be brought before
the Court of Justice. That action may be brought by the
Commission – as is practically always the case – or by
another Member State. If the Court finds that an
obligation has not been fulfilled, the Member State
concerned must terminate the breach without delay. If,
after new proceedings are initiated by the Commission, the
Court of Justice finds that the Member State concerned has
not complied with its judgment, it may, upon the request
of the Commission, impose on the Member State a fixed or a
periodic financial penalty.
Actions for annulment
By an action for annulment, the applicant seeks the
annulment of a measure adopted by an institution
(regulations, directives, decisions). An action for
annulment may be brought by a Member State, by the
Community institutions (Parliament, Council, Commission)
or by individuals to whom a measure is addressed or which
is of direct and individual concern to them.
Actions for failure to
act
The Court of Justice and the Court of First Instance
may also review the legality of a failure to act on the
part of a Community institution. However, such an action
may be brought only after the institution 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.
Application
for compensation
In applications for compensation, based on
non-contractual liability, the Court of First Instance
rules on the liability of the Community for damage caused
to citizens and to undertakings by its institutions or
servants in the performance of their duties.
Appeals
Lastly, appeals on points of law only may be brought
before the Court of Justice against judgments given by the
Court of First Instance. If the appeal is admissible and
well founded, the Court of Justice sets aside the judgment
of the Court of First Instance. Where the state of the
proceedings so permits, the Court may itself decide the
case. Otherwise, the Court must refer the case back to the
Court of First Instance, which is bound by the decision
given on appeal.
References for a
preliminary ruling
References for a preliminary ruling are specific to
Community law. Whilst the Court of Justice is, by its very
nature, the supreme guardian of Community legality, it is
not the only judicial body empowered to apply Community
law.
That task also falls to national courts, in as much as
they retain jurisdiction to review the administrative
implementation of Community law, for which the authorities
of the Member States are essentially responsible; many
provisions of the Treaties and of secondary legislation -
regulations, directives and decisions - directly confer
individual rights on nationals of Member States, which
national courts must uphold. National courts are thus by
their nature the first guarantors of Community law. To
ensure the effective and uniform application of Community
legislation and to prevent divergent interpretations,
national courts may, and sometimes must, turn to the Court
of Justice and ask that it clarify a point concerning the
interpretation of Community law, in order, for example, to
ascertain whether their national legislation complies with
that law.
A reference for a preliminary ruling may also seek
review of the legality of an act of Community law. The
Court of Justice’s reply is not merely an opinion, but
takes the form of a judgment or a reasoned order. The
national court to which that is addressed is bound by the
interpretation given. The Court’s judgment also binds
other national courts before which a problem of the same
nature is raised. References for a preliminary ruling also
serve to enable any European citizen to seek clarification
of the Community rules which concern him. Although such a
reference may be made only by a national court, which
alone has the power to decide that it is appropriate do
so, all the parties involved – that is to say, the Member
States, the parties in the proceedings before national
courts and, in particular, the Commission – may take part
in proceedings before the Court of Justice. In this way, a
number of important principles of Community law have been
laid down in preliminary rulings, sometimes in answer to
questions referred by national courts of first instance.
A 2005 study found that German, Belgian and Dutch
judges made the most referrals for an interpretation of EU
law to the ECJ. |
|
|
|
[
TOP ] |
Seat
of the Court of Justice
Both the Court of Justice and the Court of First Instance
have their seats in Luxembourg.At the conference
of July 23, 1952 involving the founder Members of the
European Coal and Steel Community, Luxembourg was chosen
as the provisional seat for the Court of Justice. Its
first hearing was held on October 28, 1954.
The Decision taken by the representatives of the
governments of the Member States on April 8, 1965
(relating to the provisional location of certain Community
institutions and services) provided for the Court to
remain in Luxembourg. That agreement was confirmed by the
Decision by common accord of the representatives of
governments of the Member States at the Edinburgh European
Council on 12 December 1992 (relating to the seats of the
institutions and certain bodies and departments of the
European Communities). Pursuant to Article 1, the Court of
Justice and the Court of First Instance have their seats
in Luxembourg.
The 1965 Decision stated that future jurisdictional and
quasi-jurisdictional bodies would be located in
Luxembourg, although that paragraph was not included in
the 1992 Decision. Accordingly, in a unilateral
declaration, Luxembourg did not renounce the provisions
and potentialities of the Decision of 1965. A Protocol on
the seats of the institutions was annexed to the treaties
by the Treaty of Amsterdam of 2 October 1997. It confirmed
the Edinburgh Decision. In a Luxembourg Government
Declaration appended to the Treaty of Nice of February 26,
2001, the Grand Duchy undertook not to claim the Seat of
the Boards of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in
the Internal Market, even if such boards were to become
judicial panels. |
|
|
|
[
TOP ] |
| Legacy
The ECJ is feared by some Eurosceptics, due to its ruling
in 2001 that parts of the German Constitution were illegal
as being incompatible with the EU treaties. The ECJ has
ruled, several times, that the law of the European
Communities (consisting of treaties, regulations,
directives) is supreme to any member state laws.
The ECJ therefore has the power to declare that any
national law inconsistent with a law of the European
Community is invalid. This practice remained relatively
unnoticed since the inception of the European Communities,
and has only in recent years attracted scrutiny. |
|
|
|
[
TOP ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
