EFTA Court of Justice

The EFTA Court of Justice is a supranational court for the EFTA states. It was established by the European Union after the three EFTA member states Norway , Iceland and Liechtenstein joined the European Economic Area (EEA) in order to ensure the uniform application of EU law in these three states. Like the European Court of Justice (ECJ), it has its seat in Luxembourg . It was founded in 1994 on the basis of the Agreement on the EEA.

Legal bases and jurisdiction

The legal basis for the establishment of the EFTA Court of Justice is, in particular, Article 108 (2) of the EEA Agreement with all the protocols and amendments that have been issued and adopted.

The provisions of the EEA Agreement are to be interpreted and applied by the EFTA Court of Justice in accordance with the relevant decisions that the European Court of Justice (ECJ) issued before the EEA Agreement was signed on May 2, 1992.

The EFTA Court is responsible for

Actions relating to the surveillance procedure affecting the EFTA states,
Appeal against decisions of the EFTA Surveillance Authority in competition matters and
the settlement of disputes between two or more EFTA states.

The work of the Court of Justice is regulated in a statute.

Homogeneity of legal interpretation

Due to the existence of two supranational courts (EFTA Court of Justice and ECJ ), both of which have jurisdiction within the framework of the European internal market , avoiding divergences in the judicature of these courts is a particular challenge.

In order to avoid such discrepancies in judicature between the ECJ and the EFTA Court, the EEA Joint Committee has been provided with constant information so that the development of case law is homogeneous (Art. 105 (1) EEA Agreement).

According to Article 105 (2) of the EEA Agreement, the EEA Committee “ constantly monitors the development of the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Communities and of the EFTA Court of Justice referred to in Article 108 (2) (EEA Agreement). For this purpose, the judgments of these courts are forwarded to the EEA Joint Committee; This is committed to ensuring that the homogeneous interpretation of the agreement is preserved . "

" If the EEA Joint Committee does not succeed in maintaining the homogeneous interpretation of the Agreement within two months after a discrepancy in the case law of the two courts has been submitted to it, the procedures of Art. 111 can be applied " (Art. 105 (3) EEA Agreement).

Because both courts are independent and independent of instructions, direct influence is not possible and the route described above must be followed. By mutual exchange of information about

Judgments of the EFTA Court of Justice,
of the Court of Justice of the European Communities and
of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities and of
Courts of last instance of the EFTA states

The joint EEA Committee is intended to ensure the uniform interpretation of the EEA Agreement while fully preserving the independence of the courts (Art. 106 (1) EEA Agreement).

The EFTA states can also allow a national court or court of justice to “ request the Court of Justice of the European Communities to rule on the interpretation of an EEA provision ” (Art. 107 EEA Agreement).

Judge

The EFTA Court is currently composed of three judges, one each from the EFTA states that have acceded to the EEA (Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland).

Páll Hreinsson ( seconded to the EFTA Court for Iceland) has been President of the EFTA Court since January 1, 2018 . The other two judges are Per Christiansen (Norway) and Bernd Hammermann (Liechtenstein).

The term of office of a judge is six years. The task of the EFTA Court of Justice is to interpret the EEA Agreement for the EFTA states. It is thus the counterpart to the ECJ, which is responsible for this on the EU side. Since it was founded in 1994, more than 280 cases have been registered.

Web links

literature

Waldemar Hummer : The European Economic Area and Austria: Legal and Economic Effects of the EEA . 1st edition. Böhlau Verlag , Vienna 1994, ISBN 3-205-98191-X .

proof

↑ Marianne Wüthrich: “EFTA Court” has nothing to do with EFTA Zeit -fragen, November 10, 2015
↑ Agreement on the European Economic Area ( Memento of August 7, 2015 in the Internet Archive ), text of the contract, accessed on July 5, 2017
↑ Agreement on the European Economic Area Explanations on the EUR-Lex website, May 24, 2016
↑ cf. Art. 6 EEA Agreement
↑ Art. 108 (2) letters a to c EEA Agreement
↑ Protocol 5 of the Surveillance Authority / Court of Justice Agreement on the Statute of the EFTA Court of Justice as of 2010
↑ The ECJ sees itself as the main body for the protection of community law . See the ECJ legal opinions 1/91 and 1/92. This view is also supported by Article 111 of the EEA Agreement.
↑ Art. 105 para. 1 EEA Agreement: “ In pursuit of the aim of the contracting parties to achieve the most uniform possible interpretation of the Agreement and the provisions of Community law, the essential content of which is incorporated into the Agreement, the Joint EEA Committee act in accordance with this article. "
↑ Here, above all, Article 111, Paragraph 3 of the EEA Agreement: “ If the dispute relates to the interpretation of provisions of this Agreement, which are essentially identical to the corresponding provisions of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community or the legal acts adopted on the basis of these treaties, and if the dispute is not settled within three months of the referral to the EEA Joint Committee, the contracting parties involved in the dispute may agree to the Court of Justice of the European Communities for a Request decision on the interpretation of the relevant provisions. If the EEA Joint Committee has not reached an agreement on a solution to such a dispute within six months of the initiation of this procedure, or if the parties to the dispute have not decided to seek a ruling from the Court of Justice of the European Communities by then, a contracting party may settle any Imbalances - either take a protective measure in accordance with Art. 112 Para. 2 in accordance with the procedure in Art. 113; - or apply Art. 102 accordingly. "
↑ The relevant provisions are set out in Protocol 34 to the EEA Agreement.
↑ Austria and Sweden left the EEA on January 1, 1995 and joined the EU.

[1] Marianne Wüthrich: “EFTA Court” has nothing to do with EFTA Zeit -fragen, November 10, 2015

[2] Agreement on the European Economic Area ( Memento of August 7, 2015 in the Internet Archive ), text of the contract, accessed on July 5, 2017

[3] Agreement on the European Economic Area Explanations on the EUR-Lex website, May 24, 2016

[4] . Art. 6 EEA Agreement

[5] Art. 108 (2) letters a to c EEA Agreement

[6] Protocol 5 of the Surveillance Authority / Court of Justice Agreement on the Statute of the EFTA Court of Justice as of 2010

[7] The ECJ sees itself as the main body for the protection of community law . See the ECJ legal opinions 1/91 and 1/92. This view is also supported by Article 111 of the EEA Agreement.

[8] Art. 105 para. 1 EEA Agreement: “ In pursuit of the aim of the contracting parties to achieve the most uniform possible interpretation of the Agreement and the provisions of Community law, the essential content of which is incorporated into the Agreement, the Joint EEA Committee act in accordance with this article. "

[9] Here, above all, Article 111, Paragraph 3 of the EEA Agreement: “ If the dispute relates to the interpretation of provisions of this Agreement, which are essentially identical to the corresponding provisions of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community or the legal acts adopted on the basis of these treaties, and if the dispute is not settled within three months of the referral to the EEA Joint Committee, the contracting parties involved in the dispute may agree to the Court of Justice of the European Communities for a Request decision on the interpretation of the relevant provisions. If the EEA Joint Committee has not reached an agreement on a solution to such a dispute within six months of the initiation of this procedure, or if the parties to the dispute have not decided to seek a ruling from the Court of Justice of the European Communities by then, a contracting party may settle any Imbalances - either take a protective measure in accordance with Art. 112 Para. 2 in accordance with the procedure in Art. 113; - or apply Art. 102 accordingly. "

[10] The relevant provisions are set out in Protocol 34 to the EEA Agreement.

[11] Austria and Sweden left the EEA on January 1, 1995 and joined the EU.