Abstract
The analysis presented in this article concerns the impact of Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) jurisprudence on the legal situation of Supreme Court and Supreme Administrative Court judges in Poland. The main assumption of the presented considerations is that the CJEU, in providing answers to preliminary questions submitted to it by Polish courts adjudicating cases related to judicial appointments and retirements, strengthens the independence of the courts and the independence of the judiciary, assuming that these are systemic elements of a functioning judiciary subject to EU law. For this reason, the CJEU considers itself competent to shape these systemic values under Polish law. At the same time, this body does not notice the problem of jurisdiction of Polish courts posing legal questions, which becomes an important theoretical and practical issue, because it may affect the legality and effectiveness of judgements passed on the basis of answers given by the CJEU. Detailed considerations focus on two types of judgements of the CJEU, which were made in connection with the retirement of judges, as a result of questions submitted to the Court by the Supreme Court and Supreme Administrative Court. The subject of the questions related to the compatibility with EU law of the scope of legal protection granted in Polish law to a judge against resolutions adopted in such cases by the National Council of the Judiciary. The considerations presented conclude that in the case of a CJEU judgement issued as a result of a question posed by the Supreme Court, the jurisdiction of the authority posing the question was infringed, and this should have consequences for the scope of binding the court adjudicating on the answer provided by the CJEU.
Highlights
The aim of the considerations undertaken in this article is to present a legal problem that has arisen in connection with changes made in Poland in the broadlyS understood judiciary reforms
Administrative Court submitted relevant questions, the Court of Justice of theC European Union (CJEU) evaluated the normative solutions adopted in Poland concerning the rules of retiring judges1 of the Supreme Court and the Supreme Administrative Court, and expressed its opinion on the control of acts – resolutions of the National Council of the Judiciary adopted in the procedure for appointing judges2 and upon the retirement of judges
The question of whether the CJEU was the competent court to answer the questions posed by the Supreme Court and Supreme Administrative Court comes to the foreground
Summary
Administrative Court submitted relevant questions, the CJEU evaluated the normative solutions adopted in Poland concerning the rules of retiring judges of the Supreme Court and the Supreme Administrative Court, and expressed its opinion on the control of acts – resolutions of the National Council of the Judiciary adopted in the procedure for appointing judges and upon the retirement of judges In both cases, despite the different subject matter to which the questions referred for a preliminary. In the doubt that arises in this respect, it is not a question of whether under Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union the Tribunal is competent to hear a question for a preliminary ruling, since the fact that it may act within this scope is undisputed It may be controversial in this respect that the CJEU assumed its jurisdiction to answer questions, without explicit reference to the jurisdiction of the national courts submitting the question and the subject matter of the case that gave rise to the answer. U to the EU law, and especially CJEU jurisprudence, argumentative elements occur
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
