The Court of Justice of the European Union | Fact Sheets on the European Union | European Parliament (2024)

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) is one of the EU’s seven institutions. It consists of two courts of law: the Court of Justice proper and the General Court. It is responsible for the jurisdiction of the European Union. The courts ensure the correct interpretation and application of primary and secondary EU law in the EU. They review the legality of acts of the EU institutions and decide whether Member States have fulfilled their obligations under primary and secondary law. The Court of Justice also provides interpretations of EU law when so requested by national judges.

Court of Justice

A.Legal basis

• Article19 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), Articles251 to281 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), Article136 of the Euratom Treaty, and Protocol No3 annexed to the Treaties on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union (‘the Statute’);
• Regulation (EU, Euratom)2019/629 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17April2019 amending Protocol No3 on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union;
• EU Budget (Section4).

B.Composition and Statute

1.Membership

a.Number of members (Article19 TEU and Article252 TFEU)

One judge per Member State(27). The Court is assisted by11 advocates-general. The judges of the Court of Justice elect, from among themselves, a President and a Vice-President for a renewable term of three years.

b.Requirements (Article19 TEU and Article253 TFEU)

• Judges and advocates-general must possess the qualifications required for appointment to the highest judicial offices in their respective countries or be recognised legal experts;
• Their independence must be beyond doubt.

c.Appointment procedure (Article253 TFEU)

As the end of terms of office of judges and advocates-general approaches, the representatives of Member State governments proceed to the appointment of judges or advocates-general to the Court of Justice by common accord after consultation with a panel responsible for giving an opinion on prospective candidates’ suitability (Article255 TFEU).

2.Characteristics of the office

a.Duration (Article253 TFEU and the Statute)

Six years. Partial replacement every three years, half of the judges and of the advocates-general are replaced alternately. Retiring judges and advocates-general may be reappointed.

b.Privileges and immunities (the Statute)

Judges and advocates-general are immune from legal proceedings. After they have ceased to hold office, they continue to enjoy immunity in respect of acts they performed in their official capacity. They may be removed from office only by a unanimous decision of the Court.

c.Obligations (the Statute)

Judges and advocates-general:

• Take an oath (swearing independence, impartiality and preservation of secrecy) before taking up their duties;
• May not hold any political or administrative office or engage in any other occupation;
• Give an undertaking that they will respect the obligations arising from their office.

C.Organisation and operation (Article253 TFEU and the Statute)

1.Institutional set-up

The Statute must be laid down in a separate Protocol, annexed to the Treaties (Article281 TFEU). The Court elects its President and a Vice-President from among its members for a renewable term of three years (Article9a of Protocol No3). The President directs the work of the Court and presides at hearings and deliberations of the full Court or the Grand Chamber. The Court appoints its Registrar. The Registrar is the institution’s Secretary-General and manages its departments under the authority of the President of the Court.

2.Operation

The Court establishes its Rules of Procedure, which require the approval of the Council, acting by a qualified majority. The Court may sit as a full Court with 27judges, in a Grand Chamber of 15judges or in chambers of three or five judges. The institution is financed from the EU budget, where it has its own dedicated section (Section4).

D.Achievements

The Court of Justice has shown itself to be a driving force of the European integration process.

1.General practice

Its judgment of 15July1964 in the Costa v ENEL case was fundamental in defining Community law as an independent system taking precedence over national legal provisions, establishing the principle of the primacy of EU law[1]. Similarly, its judgment of 5February1963 in the Van Gend & Loos case established the principle that Community law was directly applicable in the courts of the Member States. Other significant judgments concerning the protection of human rights include the judgment of 14May1974 in the Nold case, in which the Court stated that fundamental human rights are an integral part of the general principles of law that it upholds (4.1.2).

2.In specific matters

• Right of establishment: judgment of 8April1976 in the Royer case, in which the Court upheld the right of a national of a Member State to stay in any other Member State independently of any residence permit issued by the host country;
• Free movement of goods: judgment of 20February1979 in the Cassis de Dijon case, in which the Court ruled that any product legally manufactured and marketed in a Member State must in principle be allowed on the market of any other Member State;
• The external jurisdiction of the Community: the European Agreement on Road Transport judgment of 31March1971, in the Commission/Council case, which recognised the Community’s right to conclude international agreements in spheres where Community regulations apply;
• Recent judgments establishing an obligation on Member States to pay damages when they have failed to transpose directives into national law or failed to do so in good time;
• Various judgments relating to social security and competition;
• Rulings on breaches of EU law by the Member States, which are vital for the smooth running of the common market;
• Data protection: rulings on the ‘Safe Harbour’ agreement in Schrems I (2015) and on the EU-US Privacy Shield in Schrems II (2020), which invalidated the Commission’s adequacy decisions on the United States so as to protect the fundamental principles of European law and ensure a strong set of data protection requirements.

One of the great merits of the Court has been its statement of the principle that the Treaties must not be interpreted rigidly but must be viewed in the light of the state of integration and of the objectives of the Treaties themselves. This principle has allowed the EU to legislate in areas where there are no specific Treaty provisions, such as the fight against pollution (in a judgment of 13September2005 (CaseC-176/03), the Court in fact authorised the EU to take measures relating to criminal law where ‘necessary’ in order to achieve the objective pursued as regards environmental protection).

In2022, 806 cases were brought before the Court of Justice, of which546 concerned preliminary ruling proceedings, 37direct actions and209 appeals against decisions of the General Court. 808cases were resolved, including564 preliminary ruling proceedings, 36direct actions and196 appeals against decisions of the General Court. The Member States from which the most requests originated were Germany (98), Italy (63), Bulgaria (43) and Spain (41). The average duration of proceedings was16.4 months[2]. 1111 cases were pending as of 31December2022.

General Court

A.Legal basis

Articles254 to257 TFEU, Article40 of the Euratom Treaty, and TitleIV of Protocol No3 annexed to the Treaties on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

B.Duration and Statute (Article254 TFEU)

1.Membership

a.Number (Article19 TEU and Article254 TFEU)

Article254 TFEU provides that the number of judges shall be determined by the Statute. Article48 of Protocol No3 on this Statute, amended by Regulation (EU, Euratom)2016/1192 of 6July2016, provides that the General Court shall consist of two judges per Member State (currently54). Judges are appointed by common accord of the governments of the Member States after consultation with a panel responsible for giving an opinion on candidates’ suitability to perform the duties of a judge. Their term of office is six years, and is renewable. The judges may be called upon to perform the task of advocate-general as, unlike the Court of Justice, the General Court does not have permanent advocates-general.

b.Requirements

Identical to those of the Court of Justice (Article19 TEU). For appointment to the General Court, candidates must possess the abilities required for appointment to high judicial office.

c.Appointment procedure

Identical to that of the Court of Justice.

2.Characteristics of the office

Identical to those of the Court of Justice.

C.Organisation and operation

The judges appoint their President from among their number for a period of three years and their Registrar for a six-year term of office, although the General Court uses the services of the Court of Justice for its administrative and linguistic requirements.

In agreement with the Court of Justice, the General Court establishes its Rules of Procedure (Article254(5) TFEU). The General Court sits in chambers of three or five judges. The General Court sits as a full court or in a Grand Chamber or is constituted by a single judge. More than80% of the cases brought before the General Court are heard by a chamber of three judges.

According to the recent amendment of Protocol No3 (Article49a), the General Court shall, like the Court of Justice, be assisted by one or more advocates-general in dealing with requests for a preliminary ruling. Therefore, the judges of the General Court shall elect among them (an) advocate(s)-general for a term of three years (one re-election possible).

Recent amendments to its Rules of Procedure (April2023) permit the use of videoconferencing during hearings (Article107a Rules of Procedure). The amendments also introduce the concept of a ‘pilot case’ (Article71a Rules of Procedure). If several cases raise the same issue of law and the necessary conditions are met, one of the cases may be identified as the pilot case and the others stayed.

Proceedings may primarily be brought before the General Court, at first instance, in direct actions brought by natural or legal persons, where they are concerned directly and individually, and by Member States against acts of the institutions, bodies, offices or agencies of the EU, and in direct actions seeking compensation for damage caused by the institutions or their staff. The decisions of the General Court may be subject to appeal, limited to points of law, before the Court of Justice. On average, around30% of decisions by the General Court are challenged.

Parliament and the Council may establish specialised courts attached to the General Court to hear and determine at first instance certain categories of actions or proceedings brought in specific areas. To establish these courts, Parliament and the Council act under the ordinary legislative procedure.

In2022, 904cases were brought before the General Court, of which 858 were resolved. 792 of these cases concerned direct actions (270on intellectual and industrial property, 76 on State aid and competition, 66on the EU civil service, and380 on other direct actions). A party that is unable to meet the costs of proceedings may apply for free legal aid (54cases in2022). The average duration of proceedings was16.2 months. 1474 cases were pending as of 31December2022[3].

The former European Union Civil Service Tribunal

The European Union Civil Service Tribunal (established in2004) was responsible for ruling on disputes between the EU institutions and their staff where these were not the responsibility of a national court. As part of an overall increase in the total number of judges of the Court of Justice, the Civil Service Tribunal was dissolved on 1September2016 and integrated into the General Court by Regulation (EU, Euratom)2016/1192 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6July2016 on the transfer to the General Court of jurisdiction at first instance in disputes between the European Union and its servants. Cases pending before the Civil Service Tribunal on 31August2016 were transferred to the General Court with effect from 1September2016. The General Court continues to deal with these cases as found at that date, with the procedural steps taken by the former Civil Service Tribunal remaining applicable.

Role of the European Parliament

As early as1990, a Court of Justice ruling on a case brought by Parliament as part of the legislative procedure on the adoption of health measures to be taken following the Chernobyl nuclear accident granted Parliament the right to bring before the Court of Justice actions to have decisions declared void for the purpose of safeguarding its prerogatives under the legislative procedure.

According to Article257 TFEU, Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, may establish specialised courts attached to the General Court to hear and determine at first instance certain classes of action or proceedings brought in specific areas. Parliament and the Council are required to act by means of regulations either on a proposal from the Commission after consultation of the Court of Justice or at the request of the Court of Justice after consultation with the Commission.

According to Article281(2) TFEU, the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union is amended by Parliament and the Council, which act in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure (in the form of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council). An example of Parliament’s participation is the Court of Justice’s own proposal of 30November2022 to amend its Statute.

Parliament is one of the institutions mentioned in Article263 TFEU that may bring an action (as a party) before the Court of Justice.

According to Article218(11) TFEU, Parliament can request an opinion from the Court of Justice as to whether a planned international agreement is compatible with the Treaties. Where the opinion of the Court of Justice is adverse, the planned agreement may not enter into force unless it is amended or the Treaties are revised. For example, in July2019 Parliament asked for a legal opinion on whether the proposals for the accession by the EU to the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (the Istanbul Convention) were compatible with the Treaties (Opinion1/19).

With the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, candidates for the post of judge and advocate-general are now first appraised by a panel of seven persons, one of whom is proposed by Parliament (Article255(2) TFEU and Rule128 of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure) by means of a plenary resolution.

In accordance with Article3(1) of Regulation(EU, Euratom)2015/2422, on 21December2020 the Court of Justice submitted a report on the functioning of the General Court, which was drawn up by an external consultant. In particular, Article3(1) of Regulation(EU, Euratom)2015/2422 required the report to focus on the efficiency of the General Court, the necessity and effectiveness of the increase to56 judges, the use and effectiveness of resources, and the further establishment of specialised chambers and/or other structural changes.

On 19September2023 the JURI Committee adopted a draft report on a proposal to amend Protocol No3 on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU), aimed at transferring jurisdiction on preliminary rulings in a number of specific areas from the Court of Justice to the General Court and at extending the requirement to obtain permission to appeal in the case of appeals against certain General Court decisions. On 11April2024, the act was adopted by the Council, following Parliament’s first reading. Within the agreed text are provisions concerning the election of permanent advocates-general for a term of three years by the General Court.

ALEXANDRU-GEORGE MOȘ / Udo Bux / Mariusz Maciejewski

05-2024