European Court Of Justice: Striking Down Primary Law?

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) interprets EU law to ensure it is applied in the same way in all EU countries and settles legal disputes between national governments and EU institutions. It can also be used by individuals, companies or organisations to take action against an EU institution if they feel their rights have been infringed. The CJEU can enforce the law through infringement proceedings, annul EU legal acts, and ensure the EU takes action. However, it is unclear whether the CJEU can strike down primary law. In 2020, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) struck down the Privacy Shield, a legal mechanism that allowed companies to transfer personal data from the EU to the US without violating the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). This ruling caused significant repercussions for the thousands of companies covered by the framework, including major social media platforms.

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) can annul EU legal acts

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) interprets EU law to ensure it is applied in the same way across all EU countries. It also settles legal disputes between national governments and EU institutions. The CJEU gives rulings on cases brought before it, with the most common types being interpreting the law (preliminary rulings) and enforcing the law (infringement proceedings).

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) can indeed annul EU legal acts. If an EU act is believed to violate EU treaties or fundamental rights, the Court can be asked to annul it by an EU government, the Council of the EU, the European Commission, or, in some cases, the European Parliament. Private individuals can also request the Court to annul an EU act that directly concerns them.

The ECJ has previously struck down the Privacy Shield, a legal mechanism that allowed small and medium-sized companies to transfer personal data from the EU to the US without violating the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The ECJ ruled that the Privacy Shield did not provide sufficient protection of the fundamental rights of individuals whose data was transferred to the US, citing US national security laws that allow for mass data collection.

The ECJ has also declined to strike down certain legal frameworks, such as the "standard contractual clauses" that companies use as a legal basis for transferring personal data from the EU to the US. However, the Court warned that these clauses would need to be suspended if data protection authorities believed they did not provide adequate protection to EU data subjects.

The CJEU's role in annulling EU legal acts is an important aspect of ensuring the uniform interpretation and application of EU law across all member states. It provides a mechanism for individuals, companies, and organisations to seek redress if they feel their rights have been infringed by an EU institution.

ECJ rulings on preliminary references from national courts

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) plays a crucial role in promoting legal integration within the European Union. National courts may refer preliminary questions to the ECJ, particularly in cases where there is uncertainty regarding the interpretation or validity of EU law. This procedure is initiated by lower courts and must be undertaken by a court of last resort.

The ECJ's rulings on preliminary references from national courts have significant implications for EU legal integration. National courts generally support legal integration by referring politically sensitive cases and expressing support for EU law. However, there is scholarly disagreement regarding the expected behaviour of national courts in the EU legal system. Some argue that national courts have incentives to avoid further EU legal integration as it challenges their control over policy outcomes and may undermine legal certainty and coherence within domestic legal systems.

The ECJ's rulings on preliminary references can impact the balance between EU integration and member state autonomy. National courts may frame cases by expressing support for an integration-friendly interpretation of EU law or by defending the challenged national law. The involvement of national courts in the preliminary ruling procedure allows the ECJ to issue binding responses to questions of EU law that arise in domestic legal cases.

It is important to note that amendments to the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union have impacted the ECJ's role in preliminary reference procedures. As of 1 October 2024, jurisdiction for certain preliminary reference procedures will be transferred from the ECJ to the General Court of Justice of the European Union (EGC). These changes aim to enhance judicial efficiency and introduce transparency-enhancing procedural reforms.

ECJ rulings on enforcing the law (infringement proceedings)

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) can be asked to annul an EU legal act if it is believed to violate EU treaties or fundamental rights. This can be done by an EU government, the Council of the EU, the European Commission, or, in some cases, the European Parliament.

Enforcing the law (infringement proceedings) is a type of case taken against a national government for failing to comply with EU law. These cases can be started by the European Commission or another EU country. If the country is found to be at fault, it must rectify the situation immediately or risk a second case being brought against it, which may result in a fine.

The ECJ has ruled on several infringement proceedings, including a notable case in 2020 where it struck down the Privacy Shield, a legal mechanism that allowed the transfer of personal data from the EU to the US without violating the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The ECJ ruled that US national security laws, which allowed for mass data collection, meant that the Privacy Shield did not provide sufficient protection for the fundamental rights of EU citizens whose data was being transferred.

Another example of the ECJ's rulings on enforcing the law is its decision to uphold "standard contractual clauses" as a valid legal basis for companies to transfer personal data from the EU to the US. While the ECJ did not strike down these clauses, it warned that they could be suspended if data protection authorities believed they did not provide adequate protection for EU data subjects.

In summary, the ECJ plays a crucial role in enforcing EU law by hearing cases of infringement proceedings against national governments and annulling EU legal acts that violate EU treaties or fundamental rights. Its rulings have significant implications for data protection, competition law, state aid, trade, and agriculture.

ECJ rulings on ensuring the EU takes action (actions for failure to act)

The European Court of Justice (ECJ), officially known as the Court of Justice (French: Cour de Justice), is the supreme court of the European Union for matters of European Union law. It was established in 1952 and is based in Luxembourg. The ECJ is tasked with interpreting EU law and ensuring its uniform application across all member states.

The ECJ's rulings on ensuring the EU takes action (actions for failure to act) are an important aspect of its role. The Parliament, Council, and Commission are required to make certain decisions under specific circumstances. If they fail to do so, EU governments, other EU institutions, or, in certain cases, individuals or companies can file a complaint with the Court. This principle, known as "Action for Failure to Act," allows those affected by the inaction of the EU or its institutions to seek redress.

The ECJ has broad jurisdiction to hear various types of actions, including ruling on applications for annulment or actions for failure to act brought by a Member State or institution. Under Article 258 (formerly Article 226) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the ECJ may determine whether a Member State has fulfilled its obligations under Union law. This can be initiated by the commission or, less commonly, by another member state.

In addition to actions for failure to act, the ECJ also handles cases related to interpreting the law (preliminary rulings) and enforcing the law (infringement proceedings). National courts of EU countries are responsible for ensuring the proper application of EU law, but they may seek clarification from the ECJ if there are doubts about the interpretation or validity of an EU law. The ECJ's rulings in these cases help ensure that EU law is interpreted and applied consistently across all member states.

The ECJ's rulings have had a significant impact on ensuring the EU takes action. For example, in the 1991 case of Francovich v Italy, the ECJ established that Member States could be liable to pay compensation to individuals who suffered losses due to a Member State's failure to transpose an EU directive into national law. This ruling sent a clear message that the EU and its member states must act in accordance with EU law and highlighted the ECJ's role in ensuring that inaction or non-compliance is addressed.

ECJ rulings on annulling EU legal acts (actions for annulment)

The Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) interprets EU law to ensure it is applied uniformly across all EU countries and settles legal disputes between national governments and EU institutions. The ECJ also allows individuals, companies or organisations to take action against an EU institution if they feel their rights have been infringed.

The ECJ gives rulings on cases brought before it, with the most common types being: interpreting the law (preliminary rulings), ensuring the EU takes action (actions for failure to act), sanctioning EU institutions (actions for damages), and enforcing the law (infringement proceedings).

Actions for annulment can be brought by three types of applicants: privileged, semi-privileged, and non-privileged. Privileged applicants, including EU countries, the European Parliament, the Council, and the European Commission, can bring an action for annulment in the interest of legality without needing to prove a particular interest. Semi-privileged applicants, such as the European Central Bank, the European Court of Auditors, and the European Committee of the Regions, can bring an action for annulment solely to protect their prerogatives. Non-privileged applicants, including individuals and legal persons, can bring an action for annulment if they can establish that the contested act is addressed to them or is of direct and individual concern to them.

The ECJ can annul an EU act if it is found to violate EU treaties or fundamental rights. The annulment can be partial, affecting only certain provisions, and its effects can be applied retroactively from the point of adoption of the act (ex tunc) or from the date of the ECJ's judgment (ex nunc). The ECJ may also maintain the effects of the annulled act. The party whose act has been annulled is required to comply with the ECJ's judgment.

Frequently asked questions