Who we are
Identity control by the European Court of Justice
Articles for tag: EuGH, Identitätskontrolle
No More Excuses
Sitting as a full court, due to the exceptional importance of the case, the Court of Justice has dismissed the annulment actions brought by the Hungarian and Polish governments against the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation. A non-exhaustive account of the main substantive issues addressed by the Court.
From Romania with Love
The CJEU judgment "Euro Box Promotion" explicitly extended the Union’s requirement of judicial independence to constitutional courts for the first time. The ‘Romanian’ ruling carries an important message for the Polish government on how the EU legal order might react to the recent rulings of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal, which negate the primacy of European Union law. As a consequence, the CJEU confirms the right and the obligation of national courts to disregard constitutional court rulings that violate EU law.
VerfassungsPod: EU v. Polen
Der Konflikt zwischen der EU und Polen ist bereits viel weiter eskaliert, als man bis vor kurzem für vorstellbar gehalten hätte. Und immer noch ist kein Ende in Sicht. Aus dem innerpolnischen Verfassungskonflikt um Rechtsstaat und unabhängige Justiz ist ein europäischer Verfassungskonflikt um den Vorrang des EU-Rechts geworden. Wie konnte das passieren? Was für Kräfte sind da am Werk? Und wie kommen wir da wieder heraus?
Taking European Judgments Seriously
Today ends the deadline for stakeholder consultations for the 2022 EU rule of law report. The report is a welcome addition to the EU’s rule of law toolbox but it is missing a vital element: the non-implementation of judgments of international courts, including both the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights.
Curing the Symptoms but not the Disease
Traffic violations are not a proportionate justification to effectively deprive a person of her EU citizenship. This may sound obvious but in reality it was not, as the crucial Grand Chamber case of JY decided on January 18 demonstrates. This is a significant yet predictable addition to the edifice of EU citizenship post-Rottmann. Regrettably, the forward-looking judgment is myopic up to the point of an error of judgement as to the fundamental challenges at play in the factual constellation at hand.
Who’s Afraid of the »Big Bad Court«?
The end of 2021 brought a new chapter in the saga of how should the primacy of the EU law be applied by Romanian courts. A press release of the Romanian Constitutional Court, issued on 23 December 2021, raised concerns about the conformity with the principles set forth in the case law of the CJEU regarding the primacy. The press release, albeit a non-legal document, might have a dissuasive effect upon the judges who would be, otherwise, willing to disapply some norms of internal law, according to the latest judgment of the CJEU on the matter. In Romania, the disregard of the decisions of the Constitutional Court can be a ground for disciplinary action against judges.
Not Above the Law
In the joined cases EMA and ELA on the determination of EU agencies’ seats, a decision of the EU-Court is pending very soon. According to AG Bobek’s opinion, delivered on 6 October 2021, intergovernmental decisions the seats of the European agencies fall outside the EU Court’s judicial review. Ezio Perillo, former Judge at the General Court, does not agree with this solution. For him court has the duty to assure the effective judicial protection of intergovernmental decisions when they do not respect the institutional balance as in the EMA and ELA cases.
The Sanctity of Preliminary References
A national supreme court must not declare a request for a preliminary ruling by a lower court unlawful on the ground that the referred questions are irrelevant and unnecessary for the original case. This has been held by the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) in its important decision C-564/19 IS. In addition, the CJEU held that EU law also precludes disciplinary proceedings from being brought against national judges on the ground that they made a reference for a preliminary ruling. The case also raises important questions to what extent preliminary rulings can be effective against rule-of-law decline and make up for political EU institutions’ failure to use adequate EU tools of supervision and enforcement.
A Tale of Primacy, part III
The third act, but not the end, of the ongoing „game of Courts” between the Romanian Constitutional Court and the European Court of Justice came on 9 November 2021, with a letter by the Romanian Constitutional Court to assist the acting minister of justice with a reply to the EU Commission's concern about primacy of EU law. I will not comment again on the arguments, already developed by the Constitutional Court in its decision, but I will try to emphasize, through relevant quotes, the disregard of the rule of law requirements stated in the CJEU judgment as well as the absence of the capacity of a true dialogue with the European Court.
