8664788
Description
Mind Map by Faith Akinyeye, updated more than 1 year ago
|
Created by Faith Akinyeye
about 7 years ago
|
|
Preliminary Reference
(Incomplete)
- DEFINITION: A procedure that enables national courts to refer queries to the CJEU on the interpretation or
validity of EU law, specific to a case in their vicinity. REFERENCE: National court refers a question of EU law
to the Court of Justice. RULING: Court of Justice makes a decision on interpretation/validity of EU law.
- Art.267 TFEU: Any court or tribunal of a Member State may request the Court to give a
ruling thereon. OR in situations where there is no judicial remedy under national law, that
court or tribunal shall bring the matter before the Court.
- Only a court or tribunal can request the court to give a ruling
- Institutions falling under the scope of a 'court or tribunal'
- CHARACTERISTICS - Initially set out in Vaassen [1966] but confirmed in Dorsch Consult [1997] are the five traits of a court/
tribunal: 1) Permanent 2) Compulsory jurisdiction 3) Inter partes procedure 4) Should apply rules of law 5) Independent
(No organisational link to the parties - Schmid [2002])
- CHARACTERISTICS - Initially set out in Vaassen [1966] but confirmed in Dorsch Consult [1997] are the five traits of a court/
tribunal: 1) Permanent 2) Compulsory jurisdiction 3) Inter partes procedure 4) Should apply rules of law 5) Independent
(No organisational link to the parties - Schmid [2002])
- ONLY a court or tribunal part 'of a MS' can rely
on Art.267 - Miles [2011]
- Institutions falling under the scope of a 'court or tribunal'
- DUTY OR DISCRETION
- DUTY
- DISCRETION
- DUTY
- Only a court or tribunal can request the court to give a ruling
- The purpose of PR is the ensuring of the 'utmost uniformity' in the application of
Union law and "effective cooperation between the Court of Justice and national
courts.” ESCS [1990]
- EFFECT of PR: The CJEU sends its judgment to national courts for application and it is then up to
the national ocurts to determine whether the EU law interpreted by CJEU is relevant to the case
on the facts. The NC will be obliged to follow the CJEU ruling.
- The holding in I.C.C [1981] was that uniformity of EU
law is central , legal certainty is important and a
decision has multilateral effect – applies in all MS
- The holding in I.C.C [1981] was that uniformity of EU
law is central , legal certainty is important and a
decision has multilateral effect – applies in all MS
- Types of referred cases as per s.267(1): 1) Interpretation of the Treaty
2) Validity and interpretation of acts of the institutions, bodies,
offices or agencies of the EU
- Interpretation vs. Application: Bulmer v Bollinger [1974] - On the matter of
application, 'our courts the English judges have the final word'. But "In the task
of interpreting the Treaty, the English judges are no longer the final authority"
- Validity and Invalidity of EU law: Firma Foto-Frost [1987] - On an issue concerning whether a
decision by the Commission that conflicted with a Regulation could be declared invalid. It
was deemed that courts and tribunals may consider a Union act to be valid but cannot find
an act to be invalid. Only the CJEU has jurisdiction on such matters.
- Interpretation vs. Application: Bulmer v Bollinger [1974] - On the matter of
application, 'our courts the English judges have the final word'. But "In the task
of interpreting the Treaty, the English judges are no longer the final authority"
Want to create your own Mind Maps for free with GoConqr? Learn more.