Teaching Material THE COMMUNITY SYSTEM OF JUDICIAL REMEDIES: JURISDICTION EXAMINED: ARTICLE 234 J.H.H. Weiler European Union Jean Monnet Professor NYU School of Law AND Martina Kocjan Graduate Member of the Faculty of Law University of Oxford Copyright J.H.H. Weiler & M. Kocjan • 2004/05 These materials are offered as a public service by the Academy of European Law at the EUI in Florence and the Jean Monnet Center at NYU School of Law. They may be used for educational purposes only and cannot be commercialized in any manner. Their origin should be acknowledged in any use made of them. TABLE OF CONTENTS NOTE AND QUESTIONS..............................................................................................................2 1. RELEVANT TREATY PROVISIONS .........................................................................................3 2. WHAT IS A COURT OR TRIBUNAL? .......................................................................................4 Note and Questions .........................................................................................................................4 1.1 Case C-54/96: Dorsch Consult .......................................................................................................5 1.2 Arbitration Tribunals and Article 234 ........................................................................................11 1.2.1 Case 102/81: Nordsee.........................................................................................................................11 Note and Questions .......................................................................................................................11 1.2.2 Case C-126/97: Eco Swiss .................................................................................................................14 Note and Questions .......................................................................................................................14 1.3 Opinion of AG Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer in C-17/00: De Coster; ..................................................18 Note and Questions .......................................................................................................................18 2. THE DISCRETION TO MAKE A REFERENCE ....................................................................38 Note and Questions .......................................................................................................................38 2.1 Case 166/73: Rheinmühlen-Düsseldorf I.....................................................................................38 2.2 Case 146/73: Rheinmühlen-Düsseldorf II ...................................................................................40 3. DUTY TO REFER ........................................................................................................................41 Note and Questions .......................................................................................................................41 3.1 Case 283/81: CILFIT ....................................................................................................................42 3.2 Case 99/00: Lyckeskog..................................................................................................................45 Note and Questions .......................................................................................................................45 3.3 Case C-337/95: Parfums Christian Dior .....................................................................................49 Note and Questions .......................................................................................................................49 4. THE PRELIMINARY REFERENCE FOR VALIDITY (ART 234B) & THE TEMPORAL EFFECT OF PRELIMINARY RULINGS .................................................................................53 Note and Questions .......................................................................................................................53 4.1 Case 66/80: International Chemical Corporation ......................................................................54 4.2 Case 314/85: Foto-Frost................................................................................................................57 4.3 Cases 143/88 and 92/89: Zuckerfabrik ........................................................................................62 4.4 Case C-465/93: Atlanta II.............................................................................................................68 4.5 Case C-68/95: T-Port I..................................................................................................................75 4.6 Case 24/86: Blaizot ........................................................................................................................79 4.7 Case 4/79: ONIC............................................................................................................................83 5. THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT...................................................................................86 5.1 Case C-515/99: Reisch...................................................................................................................86 Note and Questions .......................................................................................................................86 5.2 Case 13/68: Salgoil.........................................................................................................................90 5.3 Case 104/79: Foglia-Novello I.......................................................................................................91 Note and Questions .......................................................................................................................91 5.4 Case 244/80: Foglia-Novello II .....................................................................................................94 Note and Questions .......................................................................................................................94 5.5 Case 14/86: Pretore di Salò.........................................................................................................100 Note and Questions .....................................................................................................................100 5.6 Case C-379/98: Preussenelektra.................................................................................................103 Note and Questions .....................................................................................................................103 5.7 Case C-28/95: Leur-Bloem .........................................................................................................108 Note and Questions .....................................................................................................................108 5.7.1 Opinion of AG Jacobs......................................................................................................................108 5.7.2 Judgement of the Court of Justice ....................................................................................................120 5.8 Case C-318/00: Bacardi-Martini................................................................................................123 Note and Questions .....................................................................................................................123 6. THE FUTURE OF ARTICLE 234 ............................................................................................127 6.1 Modifications by the Treaty of Nice ..........................................................................................127 Note and Questions .....................................................................................................................127 6.2 Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe .........................................................................128 Note and Questions .....................................................................................................................128 Update finished on: 5/February/2005 ii NOTE AND QUESTIONS 1. Article 234 (ex Art. 177) provides the legal foundation of the entire Community system. Strong words? We will have already seen that it is the centre-piece of the system of judicial remedies available to the individual. Later in the course we shall see that this Article provided the Court with a powerful rationale for the process Professor Weiler called the "constitutionalization" of the Treaties. Preliminary references have been the procedural vehicle through which key concepts such as direct effect and supremacy have developed. As described by Mancini and Keeling: “If the doctrines of direct effect and supremacy are […] the "twin pillars of the Community's legal system," the reference procedure laid down in Article 177 must surely be the keystone in the edifice; without it the roof would collapse and the two pillars would be left as a desolate ruin, evocative of the temple at Cape Sounion--beautiful but not of much practical utility.” (G. Federico Mancini & David T. Keeling, From CILFIT to ERT: The Constitutional Challenge Facing the European Court, 11 Y.B. Eur. L. 1, 2-3 (1991)) 2. Read first the text of Article 234 and identify the problems of interpretation to which the text of Article 234 gives rise. Examine the text carefully and systematically. Virtually all terms in the Article allow an interpretative choice in which is involved