Articles for tag: CVMEuGHprimacyRechtsstaatlichkeitRumänien

A Tale of Primacy

In its 18 May ruling Asociația „Forumul Judecătorilor din România”, the ECJ took a solid stance on the primacy of EU law by recognizing the binding nature of the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism established by the European Commission with respect to Romania in 2007. The judgment is a genuine guide to national courts on applying the primacy of EU law, especially as regards controversial issues such as the judicial independence and rule of law.

Good European Neighbours

On 21 May 2021 the Vice-President of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), Ms Rosario Silva de Lapuerta granted interim measures in the case of Czech Republic v Poland, ordering Poland to immediately cease lignite extraction activities in the Turów mine.  An action against a Member State which might have breached an EU directive – in this case by extending a lignite mining permit without carrying out an environmental impact assessment – may seem like an ordinary environmental case falling under the remit of EU law. The Czech Republic v Poland case, however, is anything but ordinary for at least two reasons.

Einheit bis zum Bruch

Mit gesteigerter Intensität versucht die Union in diesen Monaten, endlich einen seit Jahren verhandelten Vertrag zum Abschluss zu bringen, der die Assoziation der Schweiz an die Rechtsordnung der Union in einen institutionellen Rahmen stellen soll. Die angestrebte Dynamisierung und Institutionalisierung würde einen bedeutenden Integrationsschritt und eine wichtige Weichenstellung in den Beziehungen der Schweiz und der Union darstellen. Das Projekt berührt aber auch grundsätzliche Fragen der Situierung der Union in einem weiteren europäischen Horizont und gewinnt darin zusätzliche Brisanz.

Solving the Copenhagen Dilemma

By proclaiming an entirely new ‘non-regression’ principle in EU law based on the connection between Articles 49 TEU (EU Enlargement) and 2 TEU (EU values, referred to from Art. 49), the Court of Justice achieved huge progress in addressing a well-known lacuna undermining the EU legal order. The ‘non-regression’ principle is a new important direction in the notable fight for the EU rule of law started with the discovery of EU competence in, in particular, the area of judicial independence and the organization of the judiciaries in the EU Member States.

A Securitarian Solange

There is sigh of relief across Europe after the BVerfG has rejected the injunction order by the plaintiffs against the Own Resources Decision. But a decision by the French Conseil d’Etat taken on the same day might be the far more important political decision. Indeed, the French Court goes further than the BVerfG by openly resisting the application of EU law. In this case, the French Government will indeed reject EU law for an extended (and potentially unlimited) period of time.

The Conseil d’Etat refuses to follow the Pied Piper of Karlsruhe

The Conseil d’Etat categorically rejected the proposal that the courts of the member states, in particular their supreme (or constitutional) courts, would be entitled to review an "ultra vires" of the European institutions. The wording of the judgment is an implicit acknowledgement that there is a monopoly of the EU Court of Justice in the authentic interpretation of the Treaty - unlike the German Federal Constitutional Court in the Weiss case and the doctrine of constitutional identity and protection of national security.

Jeopardizing Judicial Dialogue is Contrary to EU Law

On 15 April 2021, AG Pikamäe delivered his opinion in the IS case, originating from a Hungarian criminal proceeding against a Swedish national. The national judge referred three questions for preliminary reference to the CJEU, one regarding the suspect’s right to translation and two regarding the general status of judicial independence in Hungary. As a reaction, the Hungarian Prosecutor General initiated a so-called “appeal in the interests of the law” and the Hungarian Supreme Court held the reference to be unlawful.