header-logo header-logo

ECJ facing workload crisis

14 April 2011
Issue: 7461 + 7462 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Solution to improve workload issues is to increase the judiciary

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) is facing a “crisis” due to its workload and urgently needs to appoint more advocates-general and judges, a House of Lords’ report has found.

The expansion of the jurisdiction of the ECJ since the Lisbon Treaty coupled with the rise in EU membership to 27 states has led to an unmanageable high a burden on the court, according to the report, published last week by the Lords’ EU sub-committee on justice and institutions.

While the ECJ is facing “another crisis of workload soon”, the prognosis for the General Court is “even bleaker”. It is “struggling to manage its existing and ever increasing workload, and [has been] twice criticized by the ECJ for taking too long to deliver justice, most recently in 2009”.

The report calls for “urgent” structural solutions to be found, and recommends the appointment of more judges in the General Court and more advocates-general in the ECJ to speed up the handling of cases.

There are currently 27 judges in the ECJ, one for every member state, plus eight advocates-general. The General Court, which also has 27 judges, hears more fact-based and evidence-based cases. One tenth of its cases involve competition law, including challenges to mergers and allegations of anti-competitive behavior, sometimes with files running to 20,000 pages.

The Lords’ committee heard that the ECJ has usually received about 250 references from national courts but last year this rose to 300 in the first nine months, which suggests an annual figure of 400.

Lord Bowness, chairman of the sub-committee, said: “The General Court has an excessive case–load leading to serious delays for litigants, for example, an average time of 33 months for competition cases which is clearly unacceptable, and we believe that the time to leave the court to work as it is has passed.

“Solutions need to be addressed, and we strongly feel that the only long term way of improving the workload issues is to increase the judiciary.”

Issue: 7461 + 7462 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll