scholarly journals Effective Judicial Protection. Landmarks of Recent Case Law of the Court of Justice of the European Union

Author(s):  
Constanta MATUSESCU ◽  
◽  
Steluta IONESCU ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 294-324
Author(s):  
Lorenzo Squintani ◽  
Ernst J.H. Plambeck

Despite the importance of access to justice in the context of plans and programmes affecting the environment, no single eu secondary law measure requires Member States to ensure effective judicial protection against such acts, and thus access to the preliminary reference procedure. At national level, this could lead to the absence of procedures to ensure effective judicial protection against plans and programmes. The Netherlands is used in this contribution as an example of the presence of such a lacuna. We argue that the lack of effective judicial protection against plans and programmes affecting the environment is in breach of both the Aarhus Convention and eu law. The duty to reconsider definitive acts, as established under the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, can serve as a short-term solution to offer effective judicial protection by the backdoor.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hana Kováčiková ◽  

To exclude or not to exclude? A question asked by many contracting authorities when assessing bids submitted by tenderers, whose reliability might be compromised by their previous misbehaviour or even worst – a criminal offence. According to law, contracting authorities can exclude such tenderers. However, at the same time, tenderers should be allowed to adopt compliance measures aimed at remedying the consequences of their action. In this article the author analyses some aspects of discretional exclusion of tenderers with doubted reliability in the public procurement process according to the 2014 European Union´s Public Procurement Directive and the recent case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.


2017 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Panos Koutrakos

AbstractThe EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) was conceived of as an area ill-suited for full judicial review by the Court of Justice of the European Union. The Lisbon Treaty confers on the Court limited jurisdiction which the recent case law has interpreted in broad terms. This article will place this case law in the broader constitutional setting of the EU legal order and will provide a critical analysis of its implications for both the EU's and domestic courts. The analysis is structured on the basis of three main themes. The first is about the position of CFSP in the EU's constitutional architecture: the article will analyse the constitutional ambivalence that characterizes this position and how it is conveyed by the provisions of the Treaty on the European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union governing the Court's jurisdiction. The second theme is about the recent case law, and the integrationist approach that the Court of Justice has adopted to the scope of its jurisdiction. The third theme is about national courts: the article will argue that recent case law has been too quick to dismiss them, and that primary law renders them an essential part of the judicial review system governing CFSP.


2012 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 145-175
Author(s):  
ACL Davies

AbstractMany legal systems have specialist labour courts with jurisdiction over individual employment disputes or collective labour disputes or both. The literature identifies a number of possible justifications for the use of specialist labour courts. This chapter will engage in a critical examination of this literature in order to develop a framework for analysing the performance of courts (whether specialist or otherwise) in deciding labour law cases. We shall then apply that framework to some of the recent case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.


2012 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 145-175
Author(s):  
ACL Davies

AbstractMany legal systems have specialist labour courts with jurisdiction over individual employment disputes or collective labour disputes or both. The literature identifies a number of possible justifications for the use of specialist labour courts. This chapter will engage in a critical examination of this literature in order to develop a framework for analysing the performance of courts (whether specialist or otherwise) in deciding labour law cases. We shall then apply that framework to some of the recent case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union.


2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 1073-1098 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mattias Derlén ◽  
Johan Lindholm

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document