Introduction

Established in 1957 following the adoption of the founding treaties of the community bloc, the Court of Justice of the European Union ensures the consistent interpretation and application of the fundamental texts and legislation of the Union. Established under Article 19 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), the court in Luxembourg aims to unify jurisdictional control within a single institution at the level of the political-economic organization.

Thus, the Luxembourg Court occupies an essential role in oversight at the European Union level. Consequently, both the structure and role of the institution have been profoundly influenced by the developments of the European bloc. For this reason, despite its ambiguous name, the Court of Justice of the European Union is composed not of one, but two separate bodies: the Court of Justice and the General Court.

In fact, the evolution and expansion of the European project have led to a significant increase and diversification in the workload of the Court of Justice. This necessitated a redistribution of the cases judged by the court in Luxembourg. This objective was first achieved through the establishment of a Court of First Instance (later becoming the General Court) and subsequently by creating a specialized court, which was later reintegrated into the former.

Nevertheless, to ensure the proper functioning of the community jurisdictional system, the two courts of the Union have had to clearly define their competencies and adapt their structures to new challenges.

Therefore, to thoroughly understand what the Court of Justice of the European Union represents, it is necessary to address separately its two component bodies.

The Court of Justice: The Forefront of the European Union’s Judicial System

As the supreme jurisdiction of the European Union, the Court of Justice has exclusive competence over cases that can have the greatest impact on the unity of European law. It is composed of twenty-seven Judges, one from each member state, and eleven Advocates General.

Both Judges and Advocates General are subject to the same requirements of impartiality and independence and enjoy the same guarantees in the exercise of their functions. However, in proceedings, they fulfill different roles. While the Advocates General issue personal opinions on the cases analyzed, which the Court may choose to follow or not, the Judges have the duty to decide and issue the final decisions of the court.

The Court of Justice has jurisdiction over several direct actions, as well as over references for preliminary rulings. In most of the cases judged by the Court of Justice, the Luxembourg court has as plaintiffs the institutions, bodies, and agencies of the Union, as well as the member states. In contrast, cases brought by individuals and legal entities are generally considered by the General Court. However, the Court of Justice can, under certain conditions, hear appeals against decisions of the General Court.

Moreover, to ensure the unity and thorough application of Union law at the national jurisdictions’ level, these latter jurisdictions have the possibility and sometimes even the obligation to refer to the Court in Luxembourg when there are uncertainties related to the Union’s law.

The General Court: A Reliable Support in Resolving Contentious Matters

Established in 1988 and operational since 1989, the General Court primarily judges actions brought by individuals or legal entities against the institutions, bodies, and agencies of the European Union. It also has jurisdiction over certain actions initiated by member states against decisions of the Commission or the Council.

With the primary aim of alleviating the workload of the Court of Justice, the Luxembourg General Court has also faced the same difficulties related to a high volume of work. Thus, starting in 2019, the expansion in the number of Judges was completed, and today the first-instance Court is composed of two Judges from each member state.

However, the General Court does not have Advocates General; in case of necessity, a non-participating Judge in the adjudicated case can fulfill this role. Moreover, following the model of the Court of Justice, the General Court hears cases in chambers of three, five, or even a single Judge. In exceptional situations, a case can be decided in the Grand Chamber.

Lastly, the Treaties allow for the delegation to the General Court of the jurisdiction over preliminary questions in certain fields, but due to the Court of Justice’s reluctance, this possibility has not yet been implemented. However, the expansion of the Union’s responsibilities in new areas could bring this option back into the bloc’s consideration.

George Boriaru

Legal Intern R&R Partners Bucharest