Court of Justice of the European Union

Following the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon on 1 December 2009, the European Union
now has legal personality and has acquired the competences previously conferred on the
European Community. Community law has therefore become European Union law, which also
includes all the provisions previously adopted under the Treaty on European Union as
applicable before the Treaty of Lisbon. In the following pages of the paper, the term Community
law' will nevertheless be used where reference is being made to the case-law of the Court of
Justice before the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon.

Composition
The Court of Justice is composed of 28 Judges and nine Advocates General. The Judges and
Advocates General are appointed by common accord of the governments of the Member States
after consultation of a panel responsible for giving an opinion on prospective candidates'
suitability to perform the duties concerned. They are appointed for a term of office of six years,
which is renewable. They are chosen from among individuals whose independence is beyond
doubt and who possess the qualifications required for appointment, in their respective countries,
to the highest judicial offices, or who are of recognized competence.
The Judges of the Court of Justice elect from amongst themselves a President and a Vice-
President for a renewable term of three years. The President directs the work of the Court and
presides at hearings and deliberations of the full Court or the Grand Chamber. The Vice-
President assists the President in the exercise of his duties and takes his place when
necessary.
The Advocates General assist the Court. They are responsible for presenting, with complete
impartiality and independence, an opinion' in the cases assigned to them.
The Registrar is the institution's secretary general and manages its departments under the
authority of the President of the Court.
The Court may sit as a full court, in a Grand Chamber of 15 Judges or in Chambers of three or
five Judges.
The Court sits as a full court in the particular cases prescribed by the Statute of the Court
(including proceedings to dismiss the European Ombudsman or a Member of the European
Commission who has failed to fulfil his or her obligations) and where the Court considers that a
case is of exceptional importance.
It sits in a Grand Chamber when a Member State or an institution which is a party to the
proceedings so requests, and in particularly complex or important cases.
Other cases are heard by Chambers of three or five Judges. The Presidents of the Chambers of
five Judges are elected for three years, and those of the Chambers of three Judges for one
year.
Jurisdiction
To enable it properly to fulfil its task, the Court has been given clearly defined jurisdiction, which
it exercises on references for preliminary rulings and in various categories of proceedings.
The various types of proceedings
References for preliminary rulings
The Court of Justice cooperates with all the courts of the Member States, which are the ordinary
courts in matters of European Union law. To ensure the effective and uniform application of
European Union legislation and to prevent divergent interpretations, the national courts may,
and sometimes must, refer to the Court of Justice and ask it to clarify a point concerning the
interpretation of EU law, so that they may ascertain, for example, whether their national
legislation complies with that law. A reference for a preliminary ruling may also seek the review
of the validity of an act of EU law.
The Court of Justice's reply is not merely an opinion, but takes the form of a judgment or
reasoned order. The national court to which it is addressed is, in deciding the dispute before it,
bound by the interpretation given. The Court's judgment likewise binds other national courts
before which the same problem is raised.
It is thus through references for preliminary rulings that any European citizen can seek
clarification of the European Union rules which affect him. Although such a reference can be
made only by a national court, all the parties to the proceedings before that court, the Member
States and the institutions of the European Union may take part in the proceedings before the
Court of Justice. In that way, several important principles of EU law have been laid down by
preliminary rulings, sometimes in reply to questions referred by national courts of first instance.
Actions for failure to fulfil obligations
These actions enable the Court of Justice to determine whether a Member State has fulfilled its
obligations under European Union law. Before bringing the case before the Court of Justice, the
Commission conducts a preliminary procedure in which the Member State concerned is given
the opportunity to reply to the complaints addressed to it. If that procedure does not result in the
Member State terminating the failure, an action for infringement of EU law may be brought
before the Court of Justice.
The action may be brought by the Commission - as, in practice, is usually the case - or by a
Member State. If the Court finds that an obligation has not been fulfilled, the State must bring
the failure to an end without delay. If, after a further action is brought by the Commission, the
Court of Justice finds that the Member State concerned has not complied with its judgment, it
may impose on it a fixed or periodic financial penalty. However, if measures transposing a
directive are not notified to the Commission, it may propose that the Court impose a pecuniary
penalty on the Member State concerned, once the initial judgment establishing a failure to fulfil
obligations has been delivered.
Actions for annulment
By an action for annulment, the applicant seeks the annulment of a measure (in particular a
regulation, directive or decision) adopted by an institution, body, office or agency of the
European Union. The Court of Justice has exclusive jurisdiction over actions brought by a
Member State against the European Parliament and/or against the Council (apart from Council
measures in respect of State aid, dumping and implementing powers) or brought by one
European Union institution against another. The General Court has jurisdiction, at first instance,
in all other actions of this type and particularly in actions brought by individuals.
Actions for failure to act
These actions enable the lawfulness of the failure of the institutions, bodies, offices or agencies
of the European Union to act to be reviewed. However, such an action may be brought only
after the institution concerned has been called on to act. Where the failure to act is held to be
unlawful, it is for the institution concerned to put an end to the failure by appropriate measures.
Jurisdiction to hear actions for failure to act is shared between the Court of Justice and the
General Court according to the same criteria as for actions for annulment.
Appeals
Appeals on points of law only may be brought before the Court of Justice against judgments and
orders of the General Court. If the appeal is admissible and well founded, the Court of Justice
sets aside the judgment of the General Court. Where the state of the proceedings so permits,
the Court of Justice may itself decide the case. Otherwise, it refers the case back to the General
Court, which is bound by the decision given by the Court of Justice on the appeal.
Reviews
Decisions of the General Court on appeals against decisions of the European Union Civil
Service Tribunal may, in exceptional circumstances, be reviewed by the Court of Justice as
provided in the Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Procedure
Whatever the type of case, there is always a written stage and, if appropriate, an oral stage,
which is public. However, a distinction must be drawn between, first, references for preliminary
rulings and, second, other actions, known as direct actions'.
Commencement of proceedings before the Court and the written procedure
In references for preliminary rulings
The national court submits questions to the Court of Justice about the interpretation or validity of
a provision of European Union law, generally in the form of a judicial decision in accordance
with national procedural rules. When that request has been translated into all the European
Union languages by the Court's translation service, the Registry notifies it to the parties to the
national proceedings, and also to all the Member States and the institutions of the European
Union. A notice is published in the Official Journal of the European Union stating, inter alia, the
names of the parties to the proceedings and the content of the questions. The parties, the
Member States and the institutions have two months within which to submit written observations
to the Court of Justice.
In direct actions
An action before the Court must be brought by application addressed to the Registry. The
Registrar publishes a notice of the action in the Official Journal, setting out the applicant's
claims and arguments. At the same time, the application is served on the party sued, who has
one month within which to lodge a defence. The applicant may lodge a reply and the defendant
a rejoinder, the time allowed being one month in each instance. The time-limits for lodging these
documents must be complied with unless an extension is granted by the President.
In both types of action, a Judge-Rapporteur and an Advocate General, responsible for
monitoring the progress of the case, are appointed by the President and the First Advocate
General respectively.
Preparatory inquiries
In all proceedings, once the written procedure is closed, the parties may state, within three
weeks, whether and why they wish a hearing to be held. The Court decides, after reading the
proposal of the Judge-Rapporteur and hearing the views of the Advocate General, whether any
preparatory inquiries are needed, what type of formation the case should be assigned to, and
whether a hearing should be held for oral argument, for which the President will fix the date.
The public hearing and the Advocate General's opinion
When it has been decided that an oral hearing will be held, the case is argued at a public
hearing, before the bench and the Advocate General. The Judges and the Advocate General
may put to the parties any questions they consider appropriate. Some weeks later, the Advocate
General delivers his or her Opinion before the Court of Justice, again in open court. He or she
analyses in detail the legal aspects of the case and suggests completely independently to the
Court of Justice the response which he or she considers should be given to the problem raised.
This marks the end of the oral stage of the proceedings. If it is decided that the case raises no
new question of law, the Court may decide, after hearing the Advocate General, to give
judgment without an Opinion.
Judgments
The Judges deliberate on the basis of a draft judgment drawn up by the Judge-Rapporteur.
Each Judge of the formation concerned may propose changes. Decisions of the Court of Justice
are taken by majority and no record is made public of any dissenting opinions. Judgments are
signed by all the Judges who took part in the deliberation and their operative part is pronounced
in open court. Judgments and the Opinions of the Advocates General are available on the
CURIA Internet site on the day they are delivered. They are, in most cases, subsequently
published in the European Court Reports.
Special forms of procedure
The simplified procedure
Where a question referred for a preliminary ruling is identical to a question on which the Court
has already been called on to rule, or where the answer to the question admits of no reasonable
doubt or may be clearly deduced from existing case-law, the Court may, after hearing the
Advocate General, give its decision by reasoned order, citing in particular a previous judgment
relating to that question or the relevant case-law.
The expedited procedure
The expedited procedure enables the Court to give its rulings quickly in very urgent cases by
reducing the time-limits as far as possible and giving such cases absolute priority. On
application by one of the parties, the President of the Court may decide, on a proposal from the
Judge-Rapporteur, and after hearing the Advocate General and the other parties, whether the
particular urgency of the case requires the use of the expedited procedure. Such a procedure
can also be used for references for preliminary rulings. In that case, the application is made by
the national court seeking the preliminary ruling and must set out in the application the
circumstances establishing that a ruling on the question put to the Court is a matter of
exceptional urgency.
Applications for interim measures
Applications for interim measures seek suspension of the operation of measures which an
institution has adopted and which form the subject-matter of an action, or any other interim
order necessary to prevent serious and irreparable damage to a party.
The costs of proceedings
There are no court fees for proceedings before the Court of Justice. On the other hand, the
Court does not meet the fees and expenses of the lawyer entitled to practice before a court of a
Member State by whom the parties must be represented. However, a party unable to meet all or
part of the costs of the proceedings may, without having to instruct a lawyer, apply for legal aid.
The application must be accompanied by all necessary evidence establishing that party's lack of
means.
Language arrangements
In direct actions, the language used in the application (which may be one of the 24 official
languages of the European Union) will be the language of the case', that is to say the language
in which the proceedings will be conducted. With references for preliminary rulings, the
language of the case is that of the national court which made the reference to the Court of
Justice. Oral proceedings at hearings are interpreted simultaneously, as required, into various
official languages of the European Union. The Judges deliberate, without interpreters, in a
common language which, traditionally, is French.

The Court of Justice in the legal order of the European Union
For the purpose of European construction, the Member States (now 28 in number) concluded
treaties establishing first the European Communities and then a European Union, with
institutions which adopt legal rules in specific areas.
The Court of Justice of the European Union is the judicial institution of the European Union and
of the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom). It is made up of three courts: the Court
of Justice, the General Court and the Civil Service Tribunal. Their primary task is to examine the
legality of European Union measures and ensure the uniform interpretation and application of
European Union law.
Through its case-law, the Court of Justice has identified an obligation on administrations and
national courts to apply EU law in full within their sphere of competence and to protect the rights
conferred on citizens by that law (direct application of EU law), and to disapply any conflicting
national provision, whether prior or subsequent to the EU provision (primacy of European Union
law over national law).
The Court has also recognised the principle of the liability of Member States for breach of EU
law which, first, plays an important part in consolidating the protection of the rights conferred on
individuals by EU provisions and, secondly, may contribute to more diligent application of EU
provisions by Member States. Infringements committed by Member States are thus likely to give
rise to obligations to pay compensation which may, in some cases, have serious repercussions
on their public funds. Moreover, any breach of EU law by a Member State may be brought
before the Court and, where a judgment finding such an infringement is not complied with, the
Court can order payment of a periodic penalty and/or a fixed sum. However, if measures
transposing a directive are not notified to the Commission, it may propose that the Court impose
a pecuniary penalty on a Member State, once the initial judgment establishing a failure to fulfil
obligations has been delivered
The Court of Justice also works in conjunction with the national courts, which are the ordinary
courts applying EU law. Any national court or tribunal which is called upon to decide a dispute
involving EU law may, and sometimes must, submit questions to the Court of Justice for a
preliminary ruling. The Court must then give its interpretation or review the legality of a rule of
EU law.
The development of its case-law illustrates the Court's contribution to creating a legal
environment for citizens by protecting the rights which European Union legislation confers on
them in various areas of their daily life.
Fundamental principles established by case-law
In its case-law (starting with Van Gend & Loos in 1963), the Court introduced the principle of the
direct effect of Community law in the Member States, which now enables European citizens to
rely directly on rules of European Union law before their national courts.
The transport company Van Gend & Loos had imported goods from Germany to the
Netherlands and had to pay customs duties which it considered to be incompatible with the rule
in the EEC Treaty prohibiting increases in customs duties in trade between Member States. The
action raised the question of the conflict between national legislation and the provisions of the
EEC Treaty. The Court decided the question referred by a Netherlands court by stating the
doctrine of direct effect, thus conferring on the transport company a direct guarantee of its rights
under Community law before the national court.
In 1964, the Costa judgment established the primacy of Community law over domestic law. In
that case, an Italian court had asked the Court of Justice whether the Italian law on
nationalisation of the production and distribution of electrical energy was compatible with certain
rules in the EEC Treaty. The Court introduced the doctrine of the primacy of Community law,
basing it on the specific nature of the Community legal order, which is to be uniformly applied in
all the Member States.
In 1991, in Francovich and Others, the Court developed another fundamental concept, the
liability of a Member State to individuals for damage caused to them by a breach of Community
law by that State. Since 1991, European citizens have therefore been able to bring an action for
damages against a State which infringes a Community rule.
Two Italian citizens who were owed pay by their insolvent employers had brought actions for a
declaration that the Italian State had failed to transpose Community provisions protecting
employees in the event of their employers' insolvency. On a reference from an Italian court, the
Court stated that the directive in question was designed to confer on individuals rights which
they had been denied as a result of the failure to act of the State which had not implemented the
directive. The Court thus opened up the possibility of an action for damages against the State
itself.
The Court in the life of European Union citizens
Of the thousands of judgments given by the Court, the majority, particularly preliminary rulings,
clearly have important consequences for the daily life of European Union citizens. Some of
these judgments are cited below as examples from the most important areas of European Union
law.
Free movement of goods
Since the Cassis de Dijon judgment in 1979 on the principle of free movement of goods, traders
can import into their country any product coming from another country within the European
Union, provided that it was lawfully manufactured and marketed there and that there is no
overriding reason relating, for example, to the protection of health or the environment to prevent
its importation into the country of consumption.
Freedom of movement of persons
Many judgments have been given in the field of freedom of movement of persons.
In the judgment in Kraus (1993), the Court held that the situation of a Community national who
holds a postgraduate academic title, which was awarded in another Member State and
facilitates access to a profession or the pursuit of an economic activity, is governed by
Community law, even as regards the relations between that national and his Member State of
origin. Accordingly, if a Member State can make use of that title in its territory subject to an
administrative authorisation, the authorisation procedure must be intended solely to verify
whether the title was properly awarded.
One of the most well-known cases in this field is Bosman (1995), in which the Court gave a
ruling on a reference from a Belgian court on the compatibility of rules of football federations
with freedom of movement of workers. It stated that professional sport is an economic activity
whose exercise may not be hindered by rules governing the transfer of players or restricting the
number of players who are nationals of other Member States. That principle was extended in
subsequent judgments to the situation of professional sportsmen from third countries which had
entered into an association agreement (Deutscher Handballbund, 2003) or a partnership
agreement (Simutenkov, 2005) with the European Communities.
Freedom to provide services
A judgment of 1989 on freedom to provide services concerned a British tourist who was
assaulted and seriously injured in the Paris metro. On a reference from a French court, the
Court held that, as a tourist, he was the recipient of services outside his country and was
covered by the Community law principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality. He was
therefore entitled to the same compensation as a French national could claim (Cowan).
In cases referred by the Luxembourg courts, the Court declared that national provisions having
the effect that an insured person cannot obtain reimbursement of the cost of dental treatment on
the ground that it was given in another Member State constitute an unjustified restriction on
freedom to provide services (Kohll, 1998), and that refusal to reimburse costs related to the
purchase of spectacles abroad is regarded as an unjustified restriction on free movement of
goods (Decker, 1998).
Equal treatment and social rights
An air hostess brought an action against her employer on the grounds of discrimination in the
pay she received compared with her male colleagues who did the same work. On a reference
from a Belgian court, the Court held in 1976 that the Treaty rule requiring equal pay for men and
women for equal work had direct effect (Defrenne).
In its interpretation of the Community rules on equal treatment for men and women, the Court
has played a part in protecting women against dismissal linked to pregnancy. A woman who
was unable to continue work because of difficulties connected with her pregnancy was
dismissed. In 1998, the Court held that that dismissal was contrary to Community law. Dismissal
of a woman during pregnancy for absences linked to pregnancy-related illness is unlawful
discrimination on grounds of sex (Brown).
In order to ensure the protection of the health and safety of workers, workers must have paid
annual leave. In 1999, BECTU, a British trade union, challenged United Kingdom legislation
which denied that right to workers on short-term contracts on the ground that it was
incompatible with a Community directive on the organisation of working time. The Court held
(BECTU, 2001) that the right to paid annual leave is a social right directly conferred on every
worker by Community law and that no worker may be denied that right.
Fundamental rights
By holding that respect for fundamental rights is an integral part of the general principles of law
it safeguards, the Court has made a considerable contribution to improving the standards of
protection of those rights. In this respect, it looks to the constitutional traditions common to the
Member States and to international treaties on the protection of human rights, on which the
Member States have collaborated or which they have signed, in particular the European
Convention on Human Rights. Following the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, the Court
will be able to apply and interpret the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union of 7
December 2000, which is recognised under the Treaty of Lisbon as having the same legal value
as the Treaties.
After numerous terrorist attacks against the police, police officers in Northern Ireland began
carrying fire-arms. However, on the grounds of public safety, women police officers were not
authorised to carry fire-arms (on the basis of a certificate issued by the competent minister
which could not be challenged before the courts). As a result, full-time contracts in the Northern
Ireland police were no longer offered to women. On a reference from a United Kingdom court,
the Court held that excluding any power of review by the courts of a certificate issued by a
national authority runs counter to the principle of effective judicial control which may be relied
upon by all persons who consider themselves wronged by discrimination on grounds of sex
(Johnston, 1986).
European citizenship
In respect of European Union citizenship which, under the Treaty on the Functioning of the
European Union, is afforded to every person holding the nationality of a Member State, the
Court has stated that such citizenship entails the right to reside in another Member State.
Accordingly, a minor who is a Member State national, is covered by sickness insurance and has
available to him or her sufficient resources also has that right to reside. The Court noted that
Community law does not require the child itself to have the necessary resources and that
refusal to grant at the same time to its mother, who is a third-country national, a right to reside
would render redundant the child's right to reside (Zhu and Chen, 2004).
In the same judgment the Court stated that, even where the purpose of acquiring the nationality
of a Member State is to obtain for a third-country national a right of residence pursuant to
Community law, it is not permissible for a Member State to restrict the effects of the grant of the
nationality of another Member State.

(Adapted from the official information from the official site of the Court of Justice of the European
Union- http://curia.europa.eu )