EU Law Live is an online publication, focused on European Union law and legal developments relate... more EU Law Live is an online publication, focused on European Union law and legal developments related to the process of European integration. It publishes News on a daily basis, along with Analyses, Op-Eds, and Weekend Long Reads.
A new chapter in the saga of national res judicata and the effectiveness of EU Law: Confirming th... more A new chapter in the saga of national res judicata and the effectiveness of EU Law: Confirming the trend towards increasing encroachments upon domestic procedural law" www.eulawlive.com Suggested citation: Araceli Turmo, "A new chapter in the saga of national res judicata and the effectiveness of EU Law: Confirming the trend towards increasing encroachments upon domestic procedural law", EU Law Live, 30 th May 2022.
HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe), 2016
a d'ailleurs été à l'origine d'un nombre particulièrement important d'arrêts concernant les condi... more a d'ailleurs été à l'origine d'un nombre particulièrement important d'arrêts concernant les conditions d'accès de ressortissants d'autres États membres à ses avantages sociaux.
HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe), Nov 22, 2022
Both series of judgments, and the inconsistency between the approaches of the two European Courts... more Both series of judgments, and the inconsistency between the approaches of the two European Courts, led to significant debates and some criticism from scholars, see inter alia: Laure Milano, 'Le principe non bis in idem devant la Cour de Luxembourg, vers un abaissement de la protection accordée au principe', [2019] Revue trimestrielle des droits de l'homme p161; Araceli Turmo, L'art du compromis : la Cour de justice opte pour une résistance modérée à l'arrêt A et B / Norvège' [2018] Revue des affaires européennes 149; MaxVetzo, 'The Past, Present
HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe), Nov 22, 2022
The history of the relationship between the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) and the ... more The history of the relationship between the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) and the French supreme administrative court, the Conseil d'État, 1 is as complex as it is long. It is, simultaneously, highly conflictual yet also an illustration of the ability and willingness of an institution to adapt to a system which represented no less of a revolution for itself than for the supreme courts of other Member States. The first decades of European integration were evidently not well received by the Conseil which, with the support of most French scholars specialising in administrative law-albeit not those who specialised in European law-primarily sought to defend its own competences from the imposition of an external influence. The 'defiant nationalism' 2 of the Conseil d'État stands in stark contrast with the successive (barring a few exceptions) French Presidents and Governments' European ambitions and the country's political elite's willingness to present France as a leader of European integration. In fact, Lord Denning's famous remark on the incoming tide of Community law 3 and the anxiety he expressed about the powers of the ECJ could very well have been formulated by a member of the Conseil d'État. Yet, one could have expected the relationship between the French administrative supreme court and European integration to be much easier considering. The Conseil had significant advantages over many other national courts in adapting to the requirements of this new legal order. Core features of European Community law at the time, such as the style of legal writing, in particular that of judgments (including the use of 'considérants' in the grounds of decisions), the use of concepts such as general principles of law, or the judicial interpretation of very vague provisions, would have been extremely familiar to French administrative lawyers. They did not, in and of themselves, require them to learn a different way of writing or reading judgments or even to work from translated documents. The influence of French administrative law is felt in numerous aspects of early Community law and perhaps most significantly in procedural law and judicial practice, which made communication between courts easier. The reaction of the Conseil d'État was nonetheless just as strong and more overtly conflictual than that of the British Court of Appeal and House of Lords (now Supreme Court), illustrating the depth of the adaptations required by the ECJ's interpretation of the treaties and the principles of direct effect and primacy. This resistance may be explained partly by a concern, similar to those expressed by other supreme courts such as the House of Lords, over a loss of control on the national legal system. The loss is both that of the court itself, as it finds itself under the authority of another jurisdiction for part of the law it is called upon to apply, and that of the national legal system, as sovereignty is limited for the benefit of the construction of a supranational legal order. In this sense, the sources of the Conseil d'État's discomfort with European Community law were not unique. However, this court's 1 The Conseil d'État is exclusively competent for matters which relate to administrative law and the judicial review of non-legislative acts. The 'private law' or 'judiciary' court system in France is headed by the Cour de cassation and covers all other areas of the law, including civil, commercial and labour law as well as criminal law. The Conseil constitutionnel is has an exclusive competence to review the constitutionality of legislative instruments. 2 'Nationalisme ombrageux', phrase employed by Roland Drago, note ss CE ass. 27 juillet 1979, n° 9664,
Projet de traité portant modification des traités instituant les Communautés européennes en vue d... more Projet de traité portant modification des traités instituant les Communautés européennes en vue d'adopter une réglementation commune sur la protection pénale des intérêts financiers des Communautés ainsi que sur la poursuite des infractions aux dispositions desdits traités, COM(76) 418, JO C 222, 22 septembre 1976. 7 La seconde version, dite « de Florence », du Corpus juris apparaît à l'annexe III de l'ouvrage de M. DELMAS-MARTY / J.A.E. VERVAELE, The Implementation of the Corpus Juris in the Member States, op. cit., pp. 189 et s.
L’autorité de chose jugée constitue une composante essentielle de tout droit processuel. Elle a é... more L’autorité de chose jugée constitue une composante essentielle de tout droit processuel. Elle a été reconnue comme un principe de droit de l’Union européenne par la Cour de justice qui l’applique en dépit de l’absence de source écrite depuis les premiers temps de la construction communautaire. Il est possible d’en identifier les fondements dans des principes fondamentaux tels que la sécurité juridique ou la protection juridictionnelle effective. L’autorité de chose jugée se manifeste tout d’abord sous la forme d’une exception d’irrecevabilité permettant de rejeter toute demande visant à remettre en cause ce qui a été définitivement tranché par les juridictions de l’Union. Cette exception ne peut être invoquée que lorsque la matière litigieuse ayant fait objet d’une première décision est identique à celle qui est en cause dans la nouvelle demande. L’autorité de chose jugée est également employée dans d’autres circonstances, afin de délimiter l’objet d’un litige en cas d’identité part...
Recent case law, in particular the rulings made by the General Court and the Court of Justice in ... more Recent case law, in particular the rulings made by the General Court and the Court of Justice in Cases Ville de Paris and Région de Bruxelles-Capitale, once again shows that the case law concerning the access of local and other devolved authorities to the action for annulment before EU Courts. While some improvements have been made thanks to limited strands of case law, e.g. concerning State aid rules, the general rule remains that they are equated to other non-privileged applicants and thus subject to stringent admissibility criteria. This state of affairs seems increasingly at odds with the substantive normative powers exercised by federated, devolved and regional authorities in particular. The Court of Justice needs to engage more explicitly with the debate related to the effectiveness of judicial protection, and to improve its own legal reasoning around its own precedents in order to increase the coherence of its case law.
EU Law Live is an online publication, focused on European Union law and legal developments relate... more EU Law Live is an online publication, focused on European Union law and legal developments related to the process of European integration. It publishes News on a daily basis, along with Analyses, Op-Eds, and Weekend Long Reads.
A new chapter in the saga of national res judicata and the effectiveness of EU Law: Confirming th... more A new chapter in the saga of national res judicata and the effectiveness of EU Law: Confirming the trend towards increasing encroachments upon domestic procedural law" www.eulawlive.com Suggested citation: Araceli Turmo, "A new chapter in the saga of national res judicata and the effectiveness of EU Law: Confirming the trend towards increasing encroachments upon domestic procedural law", EU Law Live, 30 th May 2022.
HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe), 2016
a d'ailleurs été à l'origine d'un nombre particulièrement important d'arrêts concernant les condi... more a d'ailleurs été à l'origine d'un nombre particulièrement important d'arrêts concernant les conditions d'accès de ressortissants d'autres États membres à ses avantages sociaux.
HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe), Nov 22, 2022
Both series of judgments, and the inconsistency between the approaches of the two European Courts... more Both series of judgments, and the inconsistency between the approaches of the two European Courts, led to significant debates and some criticism from scholars, see inter alia: Laure Milano, 'Le principe non bis in idem devant la Cour de Luxembourg, vers un abaissement de la protection accordée au principe', [2019] Revue trimestrielle des droits de l'homme p161; Araceli Turmo, L'art du compromis : la Cour de justice opte pour une résistance modérée à l'arrêt A et B / Norvège' [2018] Revue des affaires européennes 149; MaxVetzo, 'The Past, Present
HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe), Nov 22, 2022
The history of the relationship between the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) and the ... more The history of the relationship between the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) and the French supreme administrative court, the Conseil d'État, 1 is as complex as it is long. It is, simultaneously, highly conflictual yet also an illustration of the ability and willingness of an institution to adapt to a system which represented no less of a revolution for itself than for the supreme courts of other Member States. The first decades of European integration were evidently not well received by the Conseil which, with the support of most French scholars specialising in administrative law-albeit not those who specialised in European law-primarily sought to defend its own competences from the imposition of an external influence. The 'defiant nationalism' 2 of the Conseil d'État stands in stark contrast with the successive (barring a few exceptions) French Presidents and Governments' European ambitions and the country's political elite's willingness to present France as a leader of European integration. In fact, Lord Denning's famous remark on the incoming tide of Community law 3 and the anxiety he expressed about the powers of the ECJ could very well have been formulated by a member of the Conseil d'État. Yet, one could have expected the relationship between the French administrative supreme court and European integration to be much easier considering. The Conseil had significant advantages over many other national courts in adapting to the requirements of this new legal order. Core features of European Community law at the time, such as the style of legal writing, in particular that of judgments (including the use of 'considérants' in the grounds of decisions), the use of concepts such as general principles of law, or the judicial interpretation of very vague provisions, would have been extremely familiar to French administrative lawyers. They did not, in and of themselves, require them to learn a different way of writing or reading judgments or even to work from translated documents. The influence of French administrative law is felt in numerous aspects of early Community law and perhaps most significantly in procedural law and judicial practice, which made communication between courts easier. The reaction of the Conseil d'État was nonetheless just as strong and more overtly conflictual than that of the British Court of Appeal and House of Lords (now Supreme Court), illustrating the depth of the adaptations required by the ECJ's interpretation of the treaties and the principles of direct effect and primacy. This resistance may be explained partly by a concern, similar to those expressed by other supreme courts such as the House of Lords, over a loss of control on the national legal system. The loss is both that of the court itself, as it finds itself under the authority of another jurisdiction for part of the law it is called upon to apply, and that of the national legal system, as sovereignty is limited for the benefit of the construction of a supranational legal order. In this sense, the sources of the Conseil d'État's discomfort with European Community law were not unique. However, this court's 1 The Conseil d'État is exclusively competent for matters which relate to administrative law and the judicial review of non-legislative acts. The 'private law' or 'judiciary' court system in France is headed by the Cour de cassation and covers all other areas of the law, including civil, commercial and labour law as well as criminal law. The Conseil constitutionnel is has an exclusive competence to review the constitutionality of legislative instruments. 2 'Nationalisme ombrageux', phrase employed by Roland Drago, note ss CE ass. 27 juillet 1979, n° 9664,
Projet de traité portant modification des traités instituant les Communautés européennes en vue d... more Projet de traité portant modification des traités instituant les Communautés européennes en vue d'adopter une réglementation commune sur la protection pénale des intérêts financiers des Communautés ainsi que sur la poursuite des infractions aux dispositions desdits traités, COM(76) 418, JO C 222, 22 septembre 1976. 7 La seconde version, dite « de Florence », du Corpus juris apparaît à l'annexe III de l'ouvrage de M. DELMAS-MARTY / J.A.E. VERVAELE, The Implementation of the Corpus Juris in the Member States, op. cit., pp. 189 et s.
L’autorité de chose jugée constitue une composante essentielle de tout droit processuel. Elle a é... more L’autorité de chose jugée constitue une composante essentielle de tout droit processuel. Elle a été reconnue comme un principe de droit de l’Union européenne par la Cour de justice qui l’applique en dépit de l’absence de source écrite depuis les premiers temps de la construction communautaire. Il est possible d’en identifier les fondements dans des principes fondamentaux tels que la sécurité juridique ou la protection juridictionnelle effective. L’autorité de chose jugée se manifeste tout d’abord sous la forme d’une exception d’irrecevabilité permettant de rejeter toute demande visant à remettre en cause ce qui a été définitivement tranché par les juridictions de l’Union. Cette exception ne peut être invoquée que lorsque la matière litigieuse ayant fait objet d’une première décision est identique à celle qui est en cause dans la nouvelle demande. L’autorité de chose jugée est également employée dans d’autres circonstances, afin de délimiter l’objet d’un litige en cas d’identité part...
Recent case law, in particular the rulings made by the General Court and the Court of Justice in ... more Recent case law, in particular the rulings made by the General Court and the Court of Justice in Cases Ville de Paris and Région de Bruxelles-Capitale, once again shows that the case law concerning the access of local and other devolved authorities to the action for annulment before EU Courts. While some improvements have been made thanks to limited strands of case law, e.g. concerning State aid rules, the general rule remains that they are equated to other non-privileged applicants and thus subject to stringent admissibility criteria. This state of affairs seems increasingly at odds with the substantive normative powers exercised by federated, devolved and regional authorities in particular. The Court of Justice needs to engage more explicitly with the debate related to the effectiveness of judicial protection, and to improve its own legal reasoning around its own precedents in order to increase the coherence of its case law.
Res judicata is a key component of any procedural law. It has been identified as a principle of E... more Res judicata is a key component of any procedural law. It has been identified as a principle of European Union law by the Court of Justice, which has applied it since the early stages of the European Communities in spite of the absence of any written source. Its bases may be found in fundamental principles such as legal certainty or effective judicial protection. Res judicata firstly appears as an objection of inadmissibility which allows courts to dismiss any action aiming to reexamine previous decisions made by the courts of the European Union. This objection may only be raised if and when the subject-matter in dispute and the parties to the litigation are identical to those in the case which had previously been decided. Res judicata is also used in other circumstances, in order to set the boundaries of a new case which is only partly identical to the previous litigation, or in order to control access to extraordinary remedies. The European Union courts' functions also require res judicata to be linked to the normative force of judicial acts. Res judicata constitutes a useful complement to the erga omnes authority granted to annulling judgments and, to a lesser extent, to rulings holding an act to be inapplicable. It must however be firmly separated from the normative force attached to judicial rulings in so far as they constitute precedents which create or alter rules of general scope.
*** L'autorité de chose jugée constitue une composante essentielle de tout droit processuel. Elle a été reconnue comme un principe de droit de l'Union européenne par la Cour de justice qui l'applique en dépit de l'absence de source écrite depuis les premiers temps de la construction communautaire. Il est possible d'en identifier les fondements dans des principes fondamentaux tels que la sécurité juridique ou la protection juridictionnelle effective. L'autorité de chose jugée se manifeste tout d'abord sous la forme d'une exception d'irrecevabilité permettant de rejeter toute demande visant à remettre en cause ce qui a été définitivement tranché par les juridictions de l'Union. Cette exception ne peut être invoquée que lorsque la matière litigieuse ayant fait objet d'une première décision est identique à celle qui est en cause dans la nouvelle demande. L'autorité de chose jugée est également employée dans d'autres circonstances, afin de délimiter l'objet d'un litige en cas d'identité partielle des matières litigieuses et pour encadrer l'exercice des voies de recours extraordinaires. Les fonctions des juridictions de l'Union européenne exigent également une mise en relation de l'autorité de chose jugée avec la portée normative des actes juridictionnels. Elle constitue un complément nécessaire à la portée erga omnes reconnue aux arrêts d'annulation et, dans une moindre mesure, aux constats d'inapplicabilité résultant de voies de contestation incidentes des actes de l'Union. Elle doit toutefois être distinguée de la portée normative reconnue aux arrêts en tant que précédents créant ou modifiant des normes de portée générale.
The effects of preliminary rulings have long been a topic of interest and, at times, of controver... more The effects of preliminary rulings have long been a topic of interest and, at times, of controversy among EU legal scholars. This paper purports to prove that the effects of such rulings are not truly specific and defends the use of the well-established categories of res judicata and precedent in order to describe them. Res judicata, and the idea of its 'positive' effects developed for example in the French procedural system, applies to such rulings and provides perfectly well-suited tools to describe the effects they produce within the national proceedings which give rise to them. Conversely, the concept of precedent and the analytical tools constructed for stare decisis are pertinent to describe the normative impact such rulings may produce beyond the case at hand. Both types of effects are present in preliminary rulings as in other judgments of the EU Courts.
Uploads
Papers by Araceli Turmo
***
L'autorité de chose jugée constitue une composante essentielle de tout droit processuel. Elle a été reconnue comme un principe de droit de l'Union européenne par la Cour de justice qui l'applique en dépit de l'absence de source écrite depuis les premiers temps de la construction communautaire. Il est possible d'en identifier les fondements dans des principes fondamentaux tels que la sécurité juridique ou la protection juridictionnelle effective. L'autorité de chose jugée se manifeste tout d'abord sous la forme d'une exception d'irrecevabilité permettant de rejeter toute demande visant à remettre en cause ce qui a été définitivement tranché par les juridictions de l'Union. Cette exception ne peut être invoquée que lorsque la matière litigieuse ayant fait objet d'une première décision est identique à celle qui est en cause dans la nouvelle demande. L'autorité de chose jugée est également employée dans d'autres circonstances, afin de délimiter l'objet d'un litige en cas d'identité partielle des matières litigieuses et pour encadrer l'exercice des voies de recours extraordinaires. Les fonctions des juridictions de l'Union européenne exigent également une mise en relation de l'autorité de chose jugée avec la portée normative des actes juridictionnels. Elle constitue un complément nécessaire à la portée erga omnes reconnue aux arrêts d'annulation et, dans une moindre mesure, aux constats d'inapplicabilité résultant de voies de contestation incidentes des actes de l'Union. Elle doit toutefois être distinguée de la portée normative reconnue aux arrêts en tant que précédents créant ou modifiant des normes de portée générale.