Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

Action for annulment under Art. 263 TFEU

No description
by

Ilka R

on 19 November 2013

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Action for annulment under Art. 263 TFEU

Action for annulment under Art. 263 TFEU
The need for more generous requirements of
locus standi
of individuals
Criticism:
Individual concern

strict requirements for access of Individuals to the Court obstacle to have
locus standi
!

Plaumann
nearly impossible for Individuals to have standing and comply with requirements
The need for more generous requirements of
locus standi
of individuals
Changes by
Lisbon Treaty
:
263 (4)
: no need of individual concern when measure is a regulatory act that is of direct concern & doesn't entail implementing measure
Possibilities of an Individual to bring judicial review of secondary law
Individuals
= non-privileged applicants - standing under 3 requirements:
act is
addressed
to the person
Art. 263 (4)
is of
direct
and
individual
concern to them
regulatory act
that is of direct concern but does not entail implementing measures

Requirements Art. 263
1)
What
acts can be challenged?
2) On
which
grounds may acts be challenged?
3) By
whom
?
4)
Within
what time?
5)
With
what consequences?
The need for more generous requirements of
locus standi
of individuals
Further clarification in
case law
:
Jégo
-
Quéré
&
UPA
: 263 & 267 TFEU provide as a complete system of legal protection for Individuals
if an Individual lacks standing under 263 (4), the applicant can have standing under 267 TFEU

Main procedure Art. 263
action for annulment can be brought
forward to challenge EU acts
fundamental principle
of EU law
claimant can request to
annul
an
act of the EU


"The CJEU shall review the legality of
legislative acts, of acts of the Council, of the Comm. and of the ECB, other than recommendations and opinions, and of acts
of the EP and of the EU Council that produce
legal effects"
What acts? Art. 263 (1)
the relevant legislation need to be amenable to judicial review

only acts that '
produce legal effects
'

no Recommendations or Opinions (despite Art. 288 TFEU)
Which grounds?
Art. 263 (2):
"lack of competence, infringement of an essential procedural requirement, infringement of the Treaties or of any rule of law relating to their application, or misuse of powers"
Who can challenge acts?
Privileged, semi- privileged and
non- privileged applicants
Art. 263 (3)
& (4)
Individual concern?
Plaumann
: restrictive test
Court gave an answer to IF:
an applicant individually concerned by a decision addressed to another Person?
Secondary Law
also
Directives
and
Regulations
can be challenged by Individuals!
Codorniu
: also Regulation can be of individual concern
Need for
effective
legal remedy for individuals!
Union law has become
greater influence
over the years - also on Individuals

supremacy of EU law
: effective remedy needed
CJEU
decides on fewer cases - issue left to Courts of MS
decline of legitimacy in EU
CJEU better suited for
task
Convincing
?
Art
267
is a remedy
for the Court and
not for Individuals!
BUT: how is
regulatory act
defined
non- legislative measure - needs individual concern
of Individual
Definition of '
regulatory

act
'
final decision in October 2013
seal hunter annulling Council Regulation on prohibiting marketing of seal products
Case: Inuit (Seal
Hunter)
Seal hunter
lacked standing
!
Regulation no regulatory act -
legislative
! (adopted by ordinary procedure)
Regulatory acts are only non-legislative
Conclusion
even after Lisbon treaty and judgment '
Inuit
' still difficult for individuals challenging EU acts!
too strict requirements for Individuals having standing before Court
more of a privilege for political parties to decide over EU legislative
Presented by Kristoffer, Sara, Martin, Yolanda, Ilka
Within what time?
2 months!
Art. 263 (6)
"within two months of the publication of the measure"
Which consequences?
The act will be declared
void
!
The institutions must take necessary measures to comply with the judgment
Art. 264 & 266
Full transcript