1 / 17

How EEA law is interpreted

How EEA law is interpreted. Gunnar SELVIK Registrar EFTA Court www.eftacourt.int gunnar.selvik@eftacourt.int. General points on the EFTA Court . Established as a part of the EEA cooperation the adjudication role Independent international Court with clearly defined competences

tawana
Download Presentation

How EEA law is interpreted

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. How EEA law is interpreted Gunnar SELVIK Registrar EFTA Court www.eftacourt.int gunnar.selvik@eftacourt.int Brussels 4 September 2014

  2. General points on the EFTA Court • Established as a part of the EEA cooperation • the adjudication role • Independent international Court with clearly defined competences • Seated in Luxembourg

  3. The original model: A Joint EEA Court • 5 judges from the ECJ - 3 judges from the EFTA states • Competence to decide all EEA cases with binding effect for both EFTA and EU • ECJ’s Opinion 1/91 turned it down as it would: • Entail a transfer of competence from the ECJ • Interfere with the ECJ’s exclusive competence to interpret EU law • Contradict the EC Treaty

  4. The current model: A separate EFTA Court • The EFTA Court interprets the EEA agreement in the EFTA states • The EU Courts interpret the EEA agreement in the EU states

  5. THE TWO PILLAR STRUCTURE UNDER THE EEA AGREEMENT EU COUNCIL EEAS+EUROPEAN COMMISSION Commission Services EU COURTS EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT EP Secretariat EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE (EESC) EESC Secretariat ICELAND LIECHTENSTEIN NORWAY EFTA STANDING COMMITTEE* EFTA Secretariat EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY EFTA COURT COMMITTEE OF MPs OF THE EFTA STATES EFTA Secretariat EFTA CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE EFTA Secretariat EEA COUNCIL Ministers of EU and EFTA EEA states EEA JOINT COMMITTEE EEAS, Commission and EU and EFTA government representatives EEA JOINT PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEE * MPs from the EFTA parliaments and MEPs EEA CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE* * Switzerland has observer status

  6. Legal basis • EEA agreement article 108(2): provides that the EFTA States shall establish the EFTA Court • Surveillance and Court Agreement (SCA) article 27:the legal basis for the establishment of the EFTA Court • Protocol 5 SCA: Statutes • Rules of Procedure • Instructions to the Registrar

  7. Organisation of the EFTA Court • 3 judges • Each EFTA state nominates one judge • One cabinet per judge, legal secretaries and personal assistants • Registrar responsible for procedural questions and for the administration of the Court • No Advocate General (≠ ECJ) • No General Court (≠ ECJ)

  8. Mr Carl BAUDENBACHER Judge/President CH Mr Páll HREINSSON Judge ICE Mr Per CHRISTIANSEN Judge NOR Mr Gunnar SELVIK Registrar NOR Organigram Mr Philipp SPEITLER Legal Secretary GER Mr Kjartan BJÖRGVINSSON Legal Secretary ICE Mr Jørgen REINHOLDTSEN Legal Secretary NOR Mr Michael James CLIFTON Legal Secretary (temp) UK Ms Bryndis PALMARSDÓTTIR Transl./Adm.Officer ICE Ms Giulia PREDONZANI Research Lawyer (temp) ITA Ms Harriet BRUHN Adm. & Fin. Officer NOR Ms Hrafnhildur EYJÓLFSDÓTTIR Personal Assistant ICE Ms Kerstin Schwiesow Personal Assistant GER Ms Silje NÆSHEIM Personal Assistant NOR Mr Tomasz Mazur Adm.&Fin. Assistant (temp) POL Ms Sharon WORTELBOER Adm. Assistant UK/LUX Mr Salim GUETTAF Man. premises FRA Ms Mary COX, Info/Comm Coord UK

  9. Types of cases Advisory Opinions (AO) Direct Actions (DA) • Infringement actions vs. EFTA States: • Initiated by ESA (art 31 SCA) • Initiated by another EFTA State (art 32 SCA) • Infringement actions vs. ESA: • Validity of ESA’s decisions (art 31 SCA) • ESA’s failure to act (art 37 SCA) • Liability of ESA (art 39 SCA) • Parties: ESA, EFTA States and in some cases private entities

  10. Advisory Opinions • Who?”..any court or tribunal in an EFTA-State..” - Art 34(2) SCA (wider term than traditional courts) • When?”Where... that court or tribunal considers it necessary to enable it to give judgment..” - Art 34(2) SCA (similar to ECJ’s preliminary rulings) • Effect? Always followed, but formally speaking not binding for national courts (≠ ECJ’s preliminary rulings) ►Norwegian Surpreme Court in Finanger case:”…must be given considerable weight...” (repeated in the STX case: ”..special reasons required to deviate from it... ”) ►National courts’ incorrect interpretation of the EEA agreement is in principle a breach of treaty obligations

  11. Procedure • Main focus on written procedure • Usually followed by an oral hearing • Right to make written observations and to participate in the oral hearing: • EFTA states, EU states, ESA, Commission and also private parties (in certain cases)

  12. The Relationship between the EU Courts and the EFTA Court • Article 105(2,3) EEA – formal equality • Art. 6 EEA and Art. 3 SCA: EEA to be interpreted in conformity with the relevant case law of the ECJ • EFTA Court following the ECJ • EFTA Court goes first • EFTA Court rulings on EEA specific problems

  13. Incoming cases Total 1994–2014: Annual average: ”Low point”: ”High point”: 216 cases (56% DA/44% AO) ≈ 10,5 cases 2 cases (1999) 30 cases (2013) Statistics (case load) Case handling time:6-8 months (ECJ: 22-24 months)

  14. WWW.EFTACOURT.INT • Court Diary • Composition of the Court • Legal Sources regarding the Court • Decided and Pending Cases • Yearly Reports of the Court as from 2004 • Contact Info: eftacourt@eftacourt.int

  15. Advisory Opinions – 1994 - 2014 5

  16. Direct Actions – 1994 - 2014 3

More Related