header-logo header-logo

In principle...

07 September 2012 / Paul Lasok KC
Issue: 7528 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , EU
printer mail-detail

Interpretation or application—is the Court of Appeal right, asks Paul Lasok QC

According to the Court of Appeal, a reference should not be made to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) for a preliminary ruling under Art 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU 267) where the issue of EU law involves applying that law rather than interpreting it. This article considers that question by reference to two Court of Appeal cases: John Wilkins (Motor Engineers) Ltd and others v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2011] EWCA Civ 429, [2011] STC 1371 and JBW Group Ltd v Ministry of Justice [2012] EWCA Civ 8, [2012] All ER (D) 69 (Jan).

What is the problem?

In John Wilkins, the application/interpretation issue concerned the compatibility with the EU law principle of effectiveness of the statutory regime for recovering overpaid VAT should a claimant be entitled to compound interest under EU law. Etherton LJ, with whom the rest of the Court of Appeal agreed, considered that a reference to

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll