Preliminary Rulings under Article 267 TFEU II - Court or Tribunal (Dorsch)
- Created by: Alasdair
- Created on: 10-11-20 20:30
View mindmap
- Preliminary
Rulings under
Article 267
TFEU II - Court or Tribunal (Dorsch)
- Dorsch Consult Ingenieurgesellschaft (case C-54/96) [1997] ECR I-4961
- Points 1-3 related to this
- 1. What was the question ECJ decided to deal with first of all?
- ECJ decided it needed to determine whether or not Federal Supervisory Board was a 'court of tribunal'
- Since Article 267 TFEU only allows references to be made by such bodies.
- ECJ decided it needed to determine whether or not Federal Supervisory Board was a 'court of tribunal'
- 2. ECJ listed relevant factors in making this determination of whether body is court or tribunal as follows
- (a) whether body is established by law
- (b) whether it is permanent
- (c) Whether its jurisdiction is compulsory
- (d) whether its procedure is inter partes
- i.e. had hearings where all parties could be present and heard
- (e) Whether it applies rule of law
- (f) whether it is independent
- 3. What was the ECJ's conclusion on this point and why?
- ECJ decided Federal Supervisory Board could indeed be considered a court or tribunal.
- Not every single one of the factors need be satisfied, it was sufficient if most of them were present.
- Broekmeulen v Huisarts Registratie Commissie (case 246/80) [1981] ECR 2311
- Before Dorsch Consult
- Appeals Committee of the Dutch medical profession
- ECJ held it was a court or tribunal
- Operated with approval and assistance of public authorities;
- reached its decisions after granting full hearing to parties;
- its decisions,affectng right to work under EC (now EU Law), were final and not subject to appeal of ordinary courts.
- ECJ held it was a court or tribunal
- Nordsee v Reederei Mond (case 102/81) [1982] ECR 1095
- ECJ ruled arbirator was not court or tribunal within meaning of Article 267 TFEU
- so could not make reference to ECJ
- Arbitration used to resolve contractual dispute between three German firms.
- ECJ stressed voluntary nature of arbitary's jurisdiction and absence of official involvement in arbitration process
- ECJ ruled arbirator was not court or tribunal within meaning of Article 267 TFEU
- ECJ decided Federal Supervisory Board could indeed be considered a court or tribunal.
- Dorsch Consult Ingenieurgesellschaft (case C-54/96) [1997] ECR I-4961
Comments
No comments have yet been made