header-logo header-logo

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

In principle...

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll