Since it was set up in 1952, more than 8,600 cases have been brought before the Court. There were already 200 new cases a year by 1978, and 1985 saw more than 400 cases brought. To cope with that influx while still dealing with cases with reasonable despatch, the Court of Justice amended its Rules of Procedure to enable it to deal with cases more rapidly and requested the Council to set up a new judicial body. The creation of the Court of First Instance In response to that request, the Council set up a Court of First Instance. The aim of the creation of the Court of First Instance in 1989 was to strengthen the judicial safeguards available to individuals by introducing a second tier of judicial authority and enabling the Court of Justice to concentrate on its essential task, the uniform interpretation of Community law. Jurisdiction of the Court of Justice It is the responsibility of the Court of Justice to ensure that the law is observed in the interpretation and applications of the Treaties establishing the European Communities and of the provisions laid down by the competent Community institutions. To enable it to carry out that task, the Court has wide jurisdiction to hear various types of action and to give preliminary rulings. The various forms of action Proceedings for failure to fulfill an obligation - Such proceedings enable the Court of Justice to determine whether a Member State has fulfilled its obligations under Community law. An action may be brought by the Commission - as is practically always the case - or by another Member State. If the Court finds that the obligation has not been fulfilled, the Member State concerned must comply without delay. However, if, after new proceedings are initiated by the Commission, the Court of Justice finds that the Member State concerned has not complied with its judgment, it may impose a fixed or a periodic penalty. Proceedings for annulment A Member State, the Council, the Commission and, in certain circumstances, the Parliament, may apply to the Court of Justice for the annulment of all or part of an item of Community legislation, and individuals may seek the annulment of a legal measure which is of direct and individual concern to them. The Court may thus review the legality of the acts of the Community institutions. If the action is well-founded, the contested measure is declared void. Proceedings for failure to act The Court of Justice may also review the legality of a failure to act by a Community institution, and penalize silence or inaction. Actions for damages In an action for damages, based on non-contractual liability, the Court of Justice rules on the liability of the Community for damage caused by its institutions or servants in the performance of their duties. Appeals Finally, the Court of Justice may hear appeals, on points of law only, against judgments given by the Court of First Instance in cases within its jurisdiction. Preliminary rulings The Court of Justice also has jurisdiction in another very important kind of procedure. Although the Court is, by its very nature, the supreme guardian of Community legality, it is not the only judicial body empowered to apply Community law. The courts of each of the Member States are also Community courts inasmuch as: they have jurisdiction to review the administrative implementation of Community law, for which the authorities of the Member States are essentially responsible; and many provisions of the Treaties and of secondary legislation - regulations, directives and decisions - directly confer individual rights on nationals of Member States which national courts must uphold. In cases involving Community law, national courts, if in doubt as to the interpretation or validity of that law, may, and in some cases must, seek a preliminary ruling from the Court of Justice on the relevant questions. The purpose of this system of seeking preliminary rulings is to ensure that Community law is interpreted and applied uniformly throughout the Community. A preliminary ruling is also the form of procedure by which any European citizen may seek clarification of the Community rules which concern him or her. Although such a ruling may be sought only by a national court which alone has the power to decide that it is appropriate do so, all the parties involved may take part in the proceedings before the Court of Justice. Once the Court of Justice rules on the law (declares what the relevant Community law is), the national court to which that ruling is addressed must apply the law, as interpreted by the Court of Justice, without modification or distortion, to the dispute before it. A ruling on interpretation by the Court also serves as a guide for other national courts dealing with a substantially similar problem or a question on which a preliminary ruling has already been given. Jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance The Court of First Instance currently has jurisdiction to rule at first instance on: all actions for annulment, for failure to act and for damages brought by natural or legal persons against the Community; actions brought against the Commission under the ECSC Treaty by undertakings or associations of undertakings; and disputes between the Community and its officials and servants. 3) Procedure Following Breach by a Member State On a proposal from the Commission or one third of the Member States, the Council - in the shape of the heads of state or government - may determine the existence of a breach by a Member State. The breach must be "serious and persistent". The European Parliament has to give its assent by a majority of its members and a two-thirds majority of the votes cast. The government of the Member State in question is first invited to submit its observations. The Council's decision establishing a breach will be considered unanimous even where a Member State abstains. Once a serious and persistent breach has been established, the Council may (but need not necessarily) suspend some of the Member State's rights under the Treaty. However, the country remains bound by its obligations. The suspension of rights might, for instance, involve withdrawing the Member State's voting rights in the Council. At this second stage, the Council acts by a qualified majority, disregarding the votes of the Member State concerned. If there is a change in the situation that led to a Member State's suspension, the Council can decide to vary or revoke the measures taken. When taking such a decision, the Council acts by a qualified majority, disregarding the votes of the Member State concerned. << wstecz dalej >>