Abstract

The aim of the article is to demonstrate the evolutionary approach of the Court of Justice to the criteria for review of the concept of a court within the meaning of EU law. It has been shown that there are three basic standards used by the Court in this area. The first one is an examination of the premises developed as part of the procedure of a question referred to for a preliminary ruling, which includes functional and systemic premises. The second one is based on Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which specifies three premises: independence, impartiality and establishment of a court by statute. The third standard of control indicated by the Court of Justice in the judgment in case C-64/16 is of a different nature. It has been applied to reforms of the justice system in the Member States and is based on the combined interpretation of three provisions: Article 2, Article 4 (2) and Article 19 (1) of the Treaty on European Union. The indicated standard was the cause of a lively discussion initiated by the constitutional tribunals of the Member States (the case of Poland and Romania). In principle, they do not question the right of the Court of Justice to review the concept of a court under the first and second standard. However, in relation to the reforms of the justice system, they emphasize their own competence, which is granted to them by their national constitutions. It should be noted that the fundamental problem that appears in the jurisprudence of both the Polish Constitutional Tribunal and the Court of Justice is the protection of primacy of the constitution and irrefutability of the judgments of constitutional tribunals by the Court of Justice.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call