Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
26 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
What is a Preliminary Ruling |
national court makes a reference to the Court of Justice on a point of either the interpretation or the vaidity of EU law that is relevant to the case |
|
|
what are the key concepts with a preliminary ruling procedure |
uniform interpretation of EU law separation of powers hierarchy/co-operationwh |
|
|
what is the essential function of Art267 TFEU |
to ensure that EU law is applied uniformly by national courts |
|
|
what are the 2 types of preliminary references |
reference on the interpretation reference on the validity (of EU law) |
|
|
whats the difference between the 2 types of national courts that can refer for a preliminary ruling |
some have the discretion to refer and some have the obligation to refer |
|
|
what was the contents of the fourth paragraph added to Art267 TFEU by the Lisbon Treatu |
an urgent preliminary ruling procedure |
|
|
how do we know what constitutes a national court/tribunal |
rich body of case law |
|
|
why is the Syfait I case useful |
provides a helpful summar of the main cumulative factors that determined what constitutes a national court/tribunal |
|
|
Can the CJEU decide on the legality of national law |
no |
|
|
what question was asked in Foto-Frost v Hauptzollamt Lübeck-Ost |
whether a national court could review the legality of an EU measure |
|
|
which body is the only body that has authority to declare an EU act invalid? |
Court of Justice |
|
|
What was said in Inuit I |
the burden is on the national legal systems to ensure that an avenue to make a preliminary reference to the Court of Justice is available under national law |
|
|
what does Art267(2) TFEU say |
any national court or tribunal may make a reference to the Court when a case is actively pending before it if it considers that a decision on a question of EU law is necessary to enable it to give judgment |
|
|
what issue did the preliminary ruling procedure cause |
caseload of the court increased dramatically |
|
|
what solution was thought of to tackle the problem of an overloaded caseload |
acte clair doctrine & prima facie |
|
|
what are the 4 main categories where references to the CJEU are rejected |
if theres no genuine dispute referred q is irrelevant to the case hypothetical scenarios question isnt articulated properly |
|
|
which case demonstrates where theres no genuine dispute |
Foglia v Novello |
|
|
what is eroded by these exceptions imposed by the CJEU |
erosion of the principle of separation of functions |
|
|
which case shows the q being referred is irrelevant to the case |
Salonia v Poidomani and Giglio |
|
|
which case shows the q submitted was a hypothetical one |
Meilicke v ADV/ORGA FA Meyer AG |
|
|
what are the two main exceptions to the duty to refer relevant questions (Art267(3) TFEU) |
q referred is materially identical to a q thats already been submitted and decided on acte clair: so obvious as to leave no scope for reasonable doubt |
|
|
which case introduced the acte clair doctrine |
CILFIT |
|
|
what concerns are there about the acte clair doctrine |
open to abuse. Difficult to monitor the safeguards in place |
|
|
which two cases relax the CILFIT comditions for the application of the acte clair doctrine |
X and Van Dijk Ferreira da Silva e Brito |
|
|
what kind of threat does the relaxation of the application of the acte clair doctrine pose |
the uniform application of EU law by increasing the possibility that national courts of last resort might not make a reference when its necessary to do do |
|
|
What does Da Costa say |
a preliminary ruling on interpretation delivered by the Court of Justice is binding on the national referring court but other national courts and public authorities should treat the ruling as authoritative |
