Review of EU Institutions Flashcards
What are the two ways which you can review EU decisions?
- directly
- indirectly
Where is the authority for direct challenge?
ART 263 of the Treaty of the Formation of the European Union
What 5 conditions does the TFEU art 263?
1) body must be amenable to JR
2) Act open to challenge
3) Institution or person has standing
4) Grounds of review met
5) Challenge within time limit
Bodies subject to review?
- Council
- Commission
- European Bank
- European Parliament
- other bodies intending to produce legal effects for 3rd parties
What is the authority for what bodies are subject to review?
Art 263 (1) TFEU
What sort of Acts are subject to review?
- Legalist of articles and recomodendations/ opinions taken by the institutions
- includes: regulations, decisions, directives and any other measures meant to have binding legal effects
What is the authority for the ECJ being able to review any measure intending on having legal effect?
Commission v Council 2009
How to determine with an act is within the meaning of Art 263?
By looking at its substance rather than form it took (Commission v Council 2009)
What are the two types of applicants in these cases?
- Privileged applicants
- Non- privileged applicants
Where is the authority for who counts as privileged applicants?
Art 263 (2)-(3)
Who does Art 263 (2)-(3) say count as privileged applicants?
- Member States
- European Parliament
- The Council
- The Commission
Who does Art 263 (2) - (3) say has standing to defend their prerogative?
- Court of Auditors
- ECB
- Committee of the Regions
Where is the authority for who are non- priviledged applicants?
art 263 (4)
Who does Art 263(4) say are non priviledged applicants?
Any Natural or legal person under certain conditions
What are the conditions upon natural and legal persons that Art 263(4) lays down?
1) Must be the addressee of a decision
2) Act must be of direct and individual concern
3) Regulatory: the act must have direct concern for the person without any implementing measure.
Difference between showing standing for legislative and regulatory acts?
- Non- priviledged applicants
- Legislative: direct and individual concern
- Regulatory : just direct concern
When will direct concern be shown and if met be a ground for challenge?
- effects legal situation of applicant
- no direction in implementation
- must be automatic
- must result directly from EU without intermediate rules
- Craig and De Burca
Where is the test for individual concern to be found?
Plaumann v Commission 1963
What were the facts of Plaumann v Commission 1963?
German gov wanted to suspend duties on clementines
- EU said no
- Refusal addressed to Gov
- Business wanted to challenge decision
- If addresses at another then needed to establish individual concern
-
What was the test of Plaumann v Commission (1963)
- Had to identify very closely to addressee
- have to be different from everyone else and be affected distinctly
Is individual concern still a necessity?
No. Art 263 amended so do not always need to establish individual concern.
What did the Lisborn alter regarding standing?
No individual concern needed when
- regulatory act
- direct concern
- no implementing measures
What counts as a regulatory act?
- not legislative (regulation, directive, directive)
- broad interpretation for implementing measure so hard to show regulatory act.
So is it easy challenge a decision of European institutions?
No, very high hurdles. Very hard.
Hard to establish standing.
Better to go to UK courts, hope for reference to ECJ
