Category

Justice & EU Litigation

J

The Rosas Legacy at the Court of Justice

Allan Rosas left the Court of Justice on 7 October 2019, after almost eighteen years of service as a distinguished member of the EU’s highest jurisdiction. He bears witness to profound changes in the EU’s judiciary, from the time of the pre-accession Court of 2004 to the recent and massive machinery of case-law production in these tumultuous times. One of the most respected judges...

The Judicial Network of the EU Goes Public

The Court of Justice published yesterday on its website a new section devoted to the documents produced in the context of the Judicial Network, created in 2017. The result is an open and fully public array of valuable legal information for practitioners and researchers working in any field of EU law. For the first time, the Court of Justice will start publishing the full text of orders for...

The Trasta Judgment and the Court’s New Approach on Standing Requirements in Actions of Annulment in Banking Supervision

Today, in the case of Trasta Komercbanka (C-663/17 P, C-665/ P and C-669/17 P), the Court of Justice rendered a landmark decision in the field of standing requirements to bring an action of annulment The Court clarified the use of Article 47 of the Charter in the interpretation of Article 267, paragraph 4 TFEU, and it has also rejected the interpretation made by the General Court on the criterion...

Can the EU Launch a Damages Action Against a Member State Using the Infringement Procedure? A Comment on Commission/UK and Commission/The Netherlands.

After months in the waiting, the Court ruled at last in two crucial infringement actions that put the final piece in the jigsaw puzzle of damages actions in EU law. In Commission/UK (C-391/17) and Commission/The Netherlands (C-395/17) the question of damages actions by the EU against a Member State was put upfront by the Commission, after decades of doubts over the issue. Using once again the...

The Scope of Application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights is Redefined Once Again – A Comment on IN and IM/Belgium

The judgment in IN and IM/Belgium, delivered yesterday by the Court of Justice, is a relevant development in the definition of Article 51.1 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and its scope of application when applied by Member States. The judgment is an interesting continuation of the Akerberg Fransson saga which still stirs the passions of EU lawyers. The judgment is relevant because it stands...

Categories