Volume 15 (2009) / Issue 2
The effective protection of those rights that the EU legal order confers on individuals has traditionally been ensured by a continuous dialogue between the supranational judiciary, the European Court of Justice (ECJ), and all national courts. Such a constitutional settlement, which worked reasonably well for several years, is now considered by some commentators under threat. The obligations imposed on national courts are perceived as too burdensome, and several recent judgments have been regarded as intruding excessively into national procedural autonomy. This article analyzes recent decisions such as Kempter, Impact, and Lucchini, SPA, and argues instead that these fears are unjustified mainly because both the ECJ and national courts are striving to achieve the same aims, namely, the effective application of a given legal system, the fair composition of litigation, the protection of the parties involved, and the promotion of the efficiency of the legal process.
All rights reserved