the court of justice and the european legal system

what is secondary law?

directives (says what to do and how to do it) and regulations (says what to do but lets member states decide how to do it)

court of justice composition

-28 justices -8 advocate generals -6 year terms, but terms are renewed every 3 years

differences between the court of justice and the general court:

-general court never meets as a plenary court, only in chambers -does not use advocates general -it can use one if it believes it is needed, it appoints another judge to serve in the case. Almost never uses one though -looks at nature of cases- into details, looks at what really happens -appeals to the court of justice on points of law, not points of fact

advocates general:

-has the same qualifications that a justice would have -equal status to justices -have cabinets, which are like their chambers. They have referendaires (aka law clarkes) who are lawyers who help them do their work. -Registry keeps track of all of the documents -Registry receives, translates, and makes sure the documents match -The five large states always get one, and then the last 3 positions rotate between the smaller states

chambers are made up...

-in either groups of 3, 5, or 15 justices -the chamber's decision is the court's decision -court only sits as all of them with the treaty says they have to or the case is very special

types of cases heard by the court

-references for preliminary rulings -direct actions -appeals from the general court

the general court

-28 members -for all EU institutions -6 year terms of office -hear direct actions cases -appeals from the Civil Service Tribunal

if a court decides they want to assign an advocate general...

-Case is now heard by chamber, plus advocate general if it is needed -The role of the advocate general, they look at exactly the same information, but does not communicate with the justices about the cases. Her job is to come up with an independent position on how the court should rule in the case

significance of the court:

-Ensures that EU laws are being interpreted the same way -Helped create the single market. Handed down the principle of mutual recognition= member states must mutually recognize each others health and safety standards, unless they can prove that there is a legitimate threat to consumer threat and well being. -Institutional balance of power -Citizen's rights

reference for preliminary ruling

-In contrast to other judicial procedures, the reference of a preliminary ruling is therefore not a recourse taken against a European or national act, but a question presented on the application of European law. -The reference for a preliminary ruling thus promotes active cooperation between the national courts and the Court of Justice and the uniform application of European law throughout the EU. -enables national courts to question the Court of Justice on the interpretation or validity of European law.

Microsoft v Commision

-In the early 2000s, the commissioned fined Microsoft ½ billion euros -Microsoft wants to take the commission to court -Only the General Court can hear actions brought by natural or legal persons against an EU institutions. Used to be called Court of First Instance.

van gend & loos case 1963

-ONLY the courts of the member states hear direct actions between legal (or natural) people and the member states -in matters of interpreting eu law, the court of the member state must ask the court of justice for a reference for preliminary ruling (or use existing court of justice case law) -The first case the European Court of Justice ever ruled on was a matter of whether national courts could hear cases involving rights bestowed by EC Treaties

how do they pick the justices for the court of justice?

-The person should be qualified to sit on their national constitutional court -Used to be the case, that each state would nominate a justice and everyone else would just accept the nomination. It's changed because sometimes there have been justices appointed who were not smart or qualified. -Now there is a formal judicial vetting process to examine the qualifications of the candidates -Elects their own president, and the president chairs everything and makes sure it runs (not as much power as in the US)

what are the steps after the advocate general comes up with their opinion on the case?

-Then there is the hearing (if necessary), the purpose of the hearing is for the justices to clarify points that were made in the filings. Hearing is not always a step. Then the deliberations begin. -The opinion of the advocate general is written and then handed to the chamber -Then they deliberate and vote -Judgement of the court is then handed down. The voting is secret and no one knows who voted for what. Judge rapporteur has to write the decision, even if they do not agree with it.

principle of primacy

-eu law takes precendence over member state law -costa v enel 1964 principle of primacy

direct actions heard by the court

-failure to fulfill an obligation (infringement proceeding) -proceedings for annulment -actions for damages direct actions can only be brought by a member state or an eu institution

process at the court of justice

-filings and interventions- the most important part of the process -Assignment of a judge rapporteur to manage the case and a Chambers to hear the case. Judge rapporteur writes the decision and manages the process. By appointing the judge rapporteur, you are deciding which Chambers will hear the case.

Union royale belge des societies de football association vs bosman

-said that only the courts of the member states can hear direct actions brought by legal or natural people against other legal or natural people in matters of eu law -role of references for preliminary ruling -concerning freedom of workers

how does direct law effect primacy?

If there is no national law governing something on the books, then the parliament doesn't have to pass it into international law. -van gend & loos

the nice treaty (in regard to the courts)

One of the major changes in the judicial structure of the European courts envisaged by the Treaty of Nice is the creation of specialised judicial panels to hear cases in specific areas. Along these lines, the Treaty of Nice enabled the Court to be granted jurisdiction in disputes relating to Community industrial property rights (Article 262 TFEU). Allowing for the creation of specialised tribunals means it is now possible, following a practice in the Member States, that a specialised EU tribunal could be created to deal with disputes in the field of employment and industrial relations. It may be that a specialised Labour Panel would be appropriate for cases raising issues of EU law in the fields of employment and industrial relations. One such specialised tribunal has been created to deal with cases involving staff employed by the EU institutions.

what is jurisprudence?

own past rulings

what is primary law?

constitutional law= the treaties