Skip to main content

2024 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

The Charter of Fundamental Rights in the Case Law of the ECJ: The Significance and Decisive Advantages of a Functional Approach

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Fundamental rights have been a significant component of European Union law for decades and an integral normative element of primary law since the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty together with the Charter of Fundamental Rights (hereinafter the “CFR”) (2009). However, the application of the CFR is strictly and formally delineated, in a way which, broadly speaking, excludes the independent application of the guarantees contained in the Charter sets out a number of conditions. These conditions and limitations define the scope of the ECJ’s competence, preventing it from being characterized as a human rights court, unlike the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter the “ECHR”). Nevertheless, it is evident that fundamental rights play an increasingly significant role in the case law of the ECJ, and the EU’s protection system in this area makes good use of its autonomy. This approach ensures that fundamental rights serve as vital tools of interpreting EU norms, allowing to decode the content and meaning from them that best correspond to the EU axiology, while also ensuring the implementation of the principle of effectiveness. Thus, fundamental rights can be regarded as the source of what is sometimes referred to as their ‘radiation’ throughout the entire EU legal system. In the debate on the future of the CFR, we must not lose sight of the fact that the European Union is first and foremost an organization serving citizens and that the effectiveness of the protection of fundamental rights is crucial in shaping pro-European attitudes in our societies.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Fußnoten
1
CJEU, judgment of 6 March 2014, Siragusa, C-206/13, ECLI:EU:C:2014:126.
 
2
Safjan and Düsterhaus (2021); Safjan et al. (2016), pp. 219–247.
 
3
Lenaerts and Gutiérrez-Fons (2020).
 
4
CJEU, judgment of 7 May 2013, Åklagaren v Hans Åkerberg Fransson, C- 617/10, ECLI:EU:C:2013:280.
 
5
Safjan et al. (2016), pp. 219–247.
 
6
See (inter alia), Lenaerts (2020), pp. 29–34; Pech and Kochenov (2021); Marques (2021).
 
7
CJEU, judgment of 27 February 2018, Associação Sindical dos Juízes Portugueses, C-64/16, ECLI:EU:C:2018:117.
 
8
See for instance such judgments as: Concerning the independence of the Supreme Court - CJEU, judgment of 11 July 2019, European Commission v Republic of Poland, C-619/18, ECLI:EU:C:2019:615; Independence of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court - CJEU, judgment of 19 November 2019, A. K. and Others v Sąd Najwyższy, CP v Sąd Najwyższy and DO v Sąd Najwyższy, C-585/18, ECLI:EU:C:2019:98; Disciplinary regime for judges - CJEU, judgment of 15 July 2021, European Commission v Republic of Poland, C-791/19, ECLI:EU:C:2021:596.
 
9
See Pech (2009), p. 53; see also, inter alia, Safjan and Düsterhaus (2019), p. 207; idem, Safjan and Düsterhaus (2014), pp. 3–40.
 
10
See on the question of the independent application of Art. 2 TEU: Rossi (2020), pp. 4–6; Safjan (2019); Safjan (2021), pp. 620–621.
 
11
On the concept of systemic crisis see, for example, Bogdanowicz and Schmidt (2018), pp. 1061–1100; von Bogdandy and Ioannidis (2014), pp. 59–96.
 
12
CJEU, judgment of 21 December 2011, N. S. v Secretary of State for the Home Department and M. E. and Others v Refugee Applications Commissioner and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, joined cases C-411/10 and C-493/10, ECLI:EU:C:2011:865.
 
13
CJEU, judgment of 5 April 2016, Pál Aranyosi and Robert Căldăraru v Generalstaatsanwaltschaft Bremen, joined Cases C-404/15 and C-659/15, ECLI:EU:C:2016:198.
 
14
See on the notion of structural crisis: Bogdanowicz and Schmidt (2018); Closa and Kochenov (2016).
 
15
CJEU, judgment of 25 July 2018, LM, C-216/18, ECLI:EU:C:2018:586.
 
16
CJEU, judgment of 15 July 2021, European Commission v Republic of Poland, C-791/19, ECLI:EU:C:2021:596.
 
17
See, in particular the position of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal: judgment of 7 November 2021, K 3/21.
 
18
CJEU, judgment of 20 September 2021, Rudy Grzelczyk v Centre public d’aide sociale d’Ottignies-Louvain-la-Neuve, C-184/99, ECLI:EU:C:2001:458.
 
19
CJEU, judgment of 8 March 2011, Gerardo Ruiz Zambrano v Office national de l’emploi (ONEm), C-34/09, ECLI:EU:C:2011:124.
 
20
CJEU, judgment of 8 March 2011, Gerardo Ruiz Zambrano v Office national de l’emploi (ONEm), C-34/09, ECLI:EU:C:2011:124, para. 42.
 
21
See inter alia Düsterhaus (2017), pp. 642–664; Düsterhaus (2012), pp. 461–489; Sarmiento and Sharpston (2017), pp. 226–243.
 
22
CJEU, order of 18 April 2023, Vantage Logistic, C-200/22, ECLI:EU:C:2023:337; CJEU order of 17 Avril 2023, Ferriere Nord SpA and Others v Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM) and Agenzia delle entrate – Riscossione, C-560/22, ECLI:EU:C:2023:327; CJEU, order of 9 November 2022, AB (Infraction de faible gravité), C-243/22, ECLI:EU:C:2022:877; CJEU, order of the Court 8 May 2019, EV v Inspectoratul General al Poliţiei Române – Brigada Autostrăzi şi misiuni speciale – Biroul de Poliţie Autostrada A1 Râmnicu Vâlcea – Deva (IGPR), ECLI:EU:C:2019:398.
 
23
CJEU, judgment of 29 July 2019, Alekszij Torubarov v Bevándorlási és Menekültügyi Hivatal, C-556/17, ECLI:EU:C:2012:712.
 
24
CJEU, judgment of 17 April 2018, Vera Egenberger/Evangelisches Werk für Diakonie und Entwicklung e.V., C-414/16, ECLI:EU:C:2018:257.
 
25
CJEU, judgment of 17 April 2018, Vera Egenberger/Evangelisches Werk für Diakonie und Entwicklung e.V., C-414/16, ECLI:EU:C:2018:257, para. 79.
 
26
CJEU, judgment of 29 July 2019, Alekszij Torubarov v Bevándorlási és Menekültügyi Hivatal, C-556/17, ECLI:EU:C:2012:712, para. 73.
 
27
CJEU, judgment of 6 October 2020, La Quadrature du Net and Others v Premier ministre and Others, joined cases C-511/18, C-512/18 and C-520/18, ECLI:EU:C:2020:791; CJEU, judgment of 8 April 2014, Digital Rights Ireland Ltd v Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and Others and Kärntner Landesregierung and Other, joined Cases C-293/12 and C-594/12, ECLI:EU:C:2014:238.
 
28
CJEU, judgment of 15 June 2021, Facebook Ireland Ltd and Others v Gegevensbeschermingsautoriteit, C-645/19, ECLI:EU:C:2021:483, CJEU; judgment of 5 June 2008, Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Poland, C-170/07, ECLI:EU:C:2008:322.
 
29
CJEU, judgment of 28 April 2022, Meta Platforms Ireland Limited v Bundesverband der Verbraucherzentralen und Verbraucherverbände – Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband eV, C-319/20. ECLI:EU:C:2022:322.
 
30
CJEU, judgment of 17 December 2020, Centraal Israëlitisch Consistorie van België e.a. and Others, C-336/19, ECLI:EU:C:2020:1031.
 
31
CJEU, judgment of 15 July 2021, IX v WABE eV and MH Müller Handels GmbH v MJ, joined cases C-804/18 and C-341/19, ECLI:EU:C:2021:594.
 
32
See also Opinion of AG Collins in the case C-148/22, Commune d’Ans of 4 Mai 2023.
 
33
In that occasion it is also worth recalling the older and well-known case law allowing to respect the specificity of a given legal system and its preferences in favour of some values, even at the price of limiting the fundamental freedoms of treaty in such cases as CJEU, judgment of 14 October 2004, Omega Spielhallen- und Automatenaufstellungs–GmbH, C-36/02, ECLI:EU:C:2004:614; CJEU, judgment of 22 December 2010, Ilonka Sayn Wittgenstein, C-208/09, ECLI:EU:C:2010:806; CJEU, judgment of 12 may 2011, Runevic and Wardyn, C-391/09, ECLI:EU:C:2011:291, or the effectiveness of EU law, as in the CJEU, judgment of 5 December 2017, Tarrico II case, C-42/17, ECLI:EU:C:2017:936.
 
34
CJEU, judgment of 26 February 2013, Stefano Melloni v Ministerio Fiscal, C-399/11, ECLI:EU:C:2013.
 
35
See Safjan (2015), pp. 545–563.
 
36
CJEU, judgment of 30 May 2013, Jeremy F. v Premier minister, C-168/13 PPU, ECLI:EU:C:2013:358.
 
37
BVerfG, 1 BvR 16/13 and 1 BvR 276/17, orders of 6 November 2019.
 
38
BVerfG, 2 BvR 1845/18, 2 BvR 2100/18, 1 December 2020.
 
39
See, inter alia, Zinonos (2023), pp. 99 et seq.
 
40
See Safjan (2022b), pp. 371–391.
 
41
Let us add that the position of the Constitutional Tribunal quoted above completely deviates from the previous jurisprudence, which inter alia in the judgment on the Treaty of Lisbon (K 32/09) indicated the community of the axiological basis for the entire European Union: “One of the objectives of the European Union, indicated in the Preamble to the Treaty on European Union, is to satisfy the desire to ‘deepen solidarity among their peoples while respecting their history, their culture and their traditions.’ The idea of confirming one’s national identity in solidarity with other nations, and not against them, constitute the main axiological basis of the European Union, in the light of the Treaty of Lisbon.”
 
42
Cf. the Polish Constitutional Tribunal, judgment of 7 November 2021, K 3/21, cited above.
 
43
See CJEU, judgment of 22 February 2022, RS, C-430/21, ECLI:EU:C:2022:99.
 
44
CJEU, judgment of 15 July 1964, Flaminio Costa v. E.N.E.L., C-6/64, ECLI:EU:C:1964:66.
 
45
CJEU, judgment of 17 December 1970, Handelsgesellschaft, C-11/70, ECLI:EU:C:1970:114.
 
46
CJEU, judgment of 9 March 1978, Simmenthal, C-106/77, ECLI:EU:C:1978:49.
 
47
CJEU, judgment of 22 February 2022, RS, C-430/21, ECLI:EU:C:2022:99, para. 69–70.
 
48
CJEU, judgment of 5 December 2017, Tarrico II, C-42/17, ECLI:EU:C:2017:936.
 
49
See Safjan (2017), pp. 51–68.
 
50
CJEU, judgment of 5 December 2017, Tarrico II, C-42/17, ECLI:EU:C:2017:936.
 
51
CJEU, judgment of 16 February 2022, Poland v Parliament and Council, C-157/21, ECLI:EU:C:2022:98, para. 264 and 266.
 
52
See Rossi (2020).
 
53
See Safjan (2019), p. 431.
 
54
See inter alia Lenaerts (2017), p. 1625; Toggenburg and Grimheden (2016), p. 155; Safjan (2022a), pp. 245–279.
 
55
See von Bogdandy et al. (2012), pp. 489–520; see also, von Bogdandy et al. (2017), pp. 218–233; Safjan (2021), pp. 621–622.
 
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Bogdanowicz P, Schmidt M (2018) The infringement procedure in the rule of law crisis. How to make effective use of Article 258 TFEU. Common Mark Law Rev 55(4):1061–1100 Bogdanowicz P, Schmidt M (2018) The infringement procedure in the rule of law crisis. How to make effective use of Article 258 TFEU. Common Mark Law Rev 55(4):1061–1100
Zurück zum Zitat Closa C, Kochenov D (2016) Reinforcing rule of law oversight in the European Union. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRef Closa C, Kochenov D (2016) Reinforcing rule of law oversight in the European Union. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Düsterhaus D (2012) Union citizenship after Ruiz Zambrano or how many rights are there in a status. In: Rodriguez JD-H et al (eds) Últimas tendencias en la jurisprudencia del Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea. La Ley, Madrid, pp 461–490 Düsterhaus D (2012) Union citizenship after Ruiz Zambrano or how many rights are there in a status. In: Rodriguez JD-H et al (eds) Últimas tendencias en la jurisprudencia del Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea. La Ley, Madrid, pp 461–490
Zurück zum Zitat Düsterhaus D (2017) EU citizenship and fundamental rights: contradictory, converging or complementary? In: Kochenov D (ed) Citizenship and federalism, the role of rights. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Düsterhaus D (2017) EU citizenship and fundamental rights: contradictory, converging or complementary? In: Kochenov D (ed) Citizenship and federalism, the role of rights. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Zurück zum Zitat Lenaerts K (2017) The rule of law and the coherence of the judicial system of the European Union. Common Mark Law Rev 44(6):1625–1659 Lenaerts K (2017) The rule of law and the coherence of the judicial system of the European Union. Common Mark Law Rev 44(6):1625–1659
Zurück zum Zitat Lenaerts K, Gutiérrez-Fons JA (2020) Les méthodes d’interprétation de la Cour de Justice de l’Union Européen. Bruylant, Brussels Lenaerts K, Gutiérrez-Fons JA (2020) Les méthodes d’interprétation de la Cour de Justice de l’Union Européen. Bruylant, Brussels
Zurück zum Zitat Marques F (2021) Rule of law, national judges and the Court of Justice of European Union: let’s keep it juridical. Eur Law J 27(1-3):228–239CrossRef Marques F (2021) Rule of law, national judges and the Court of Justice of European Union: let’s keep it juridical. Eur Law J 27(1-3):228–239CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Pech L, Kochenov D (2021) Respects for the rule of law in the case law of the European Court of Justice: A casebook overview of key judgments since the Portuguese Case. SIEPS Report, Stockholm Pech L, Kochenov D (2021) Respects for the rule of law in the case law of the European Court of Justice: A casebook overview of key judgments since the Portuguese Case. SIEPS Report, Stockholm
Zurück zum Zitat Rossi LS (2020) La valeur juridique des valeurs. L’article 2 TUE: relations avec d’autres dispositions de droit primaire de l’Union européenne et remèdes juridictionnels. Revue trimestrielle de droit européen 11(3):639–657 Rossi LS (2020) La valeur juridique des valeurs. L’article 2 TUE: relations avec d’autres dispositions de droit primaire de l’Union européenne et remèdes juridictionnels. Revue trimestrielle de droit européen 11(3):639–657
Zurück zum Zitat Safjan M (2015) Les dilemmes de l’application de standards plus élevés de protection des droits fondamentaux sous le prisme de l’identité constitutionnelles. In: La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne sous la présidence de Vassilios Skouris (2003-2015), Liber Amicorum Vassilios Skouris. Bruylant, Brussels, pp 545–563 Safjan M (2015) Les dilemmes de l’application de standards plus élevés de protection des droits fondamentaux sous le prisme de l’identité constitutionnelles. In: La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne sous la présidence de Vassilios Skouris (2003-2015), Liber Amicorum Vassilios Skouris. Bruylant, Brussels, pp 545–563
Zurück zum Zitat Safjan M (2021) On symmetry: in search of an appropriate response. In: Urbaniak J, Bodnar A (eds) Law in a time of constitutional crisis, studies offered to Mirosław Wyrzykowski. CH Beck, Munich, pp 605–622 Safjan M (2021) On symmetry: in search of an appropriate response. In: Urbaniak J, Bodnar A (eds) Law in a time of constitutional crisis, studies offered to Mirosław Wyrzykowski. CH Beck, Munich, pp 605–622
Zurück zum Zitat Safjan M (2022a) Das Recht auf wirksamen gerichtlichen Rechtsschutz. In: Glaser H, Makowicz B, Wyrzykowski M (eds) Grundrechte, Demokratie, Rechtsstaadlichkeit. Nomos, Baden-Baden, pp 245–279 Safjan M (2022a) Das Recht auf wirksamen gerichtlichen Rechtsschutz. In: Glaser H, Makowicz B, Wyrzykowski M (eds) Grundrechte, Demokratie, Rechtsstaadlichkeit. Nomos, Baden-Baden, pp 245–279
Zurück zum Zitat Safjan M, Düsterhaus D (2014) A union of effective judicial protection: addressing a multi-level challenge through the lens of Article 47 CFREU. Yearb Eur Law 33(1):3–40CrossRef Safjan M, Düsterhaus D (2014) A union of effective judicial protection: addressing a multi-level challenge through the lens of Article 47 CFREU. Yearb Eur Law 33(1):3–40CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Safjan M, Düsterhaus D (2019) The EU citizens’ Right to have rights and the courts’ duty to protect it. In: Lenaerts K, Bonichot J, Kanninen H, Naômé C, Pohjankosk P (eds) An ever-changing Union? Hart Publishing, Oxford, Perspectives on the future of EU law in honour of Allan Rosas, pp 201–212 Safjan M, Düsterhaus D (2019) The EU citizens’ Right to have rights and the courts’ duty to protect it. In: Lenaerts K, Bonichot J, Kanninen H, Naômé C, Pohjankosk P (eds) An ever-changing Union? Hart Publishing, Oxford, Perspectives on the future of EU law in honour of Allan Rosas, pp 201–212
Zurück zum Zitat Safjan M, Düsterhaus D (2021) La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne et les droits fondamentaux: Evolution, méthodes, portée et réception. In: Arnold R (ed) The protection of human rights through inter- and supranational jurisprudence, vol 14. Second International Online-Seminar Safjan M, Düsterhaus D (2021) La Cour de justice de l’Union européenne et les droits fondamentaux: Evolution, méthodes, portée et réception. In: Arnold R (ed) The protection of human rights through inter- and supranational jurisprudence, vol 14. Second International Online-Seminar
Zurück zum Zitat Safjan M, Düsterhaus D, Guérin A (2016) La Charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne et les ordres juridiques nationaux, de la mise en œuvre à la mise en balance. Revue trimestrielle de droit européen 52(2):219–247 Safjan M, Düsterhaus D, Guérin A (2016) La Charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne et les ordres juridiques nationaux, de la mise en œuvre à la mise en balance. Revue trimestrielle de droit européen 52(2):219–247
Zurück zum Zitat von Bogdandy A, Ioannidis M (2014) Systemic deficiency in the rule of law: what it is, what has been done, what can be done. Common Mark Law Rev 51(1):59–96CrossRef von Bogdandy A, Ioannidis M (2014) Systemic deficiency in the rule of law: what it is, what has been done, what can be done. Common Mark Law Rev 51(1):59–96CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat von Bogdandy A, Kottmann M, Antpöhler C, Dickschen J, Hentrei S, Smrkolj M (2012) Reverse Solange - protecting the essence of fundamental rights against EU Member States. Common Mark Law Rev 49(2):489–520CrossRef von Bogdandy A, Kottmann M, Antpöhler C, Dickschen J, Hentrei S, Smrkolj M (2012) Reverse Solange - protecting the essence of fundamental rights against EU Member States. Common Mark Law Rev 49(2):489–520CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat von Bogdandy A, Antpoehler C, Ioannidis M (2017) Protecting EU values: reverse Solange and the rule of law framework. In: Jakab A, Kochenov D (eds) The enforcement of EU law and values: ensuring Member States’ compliance. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 218–233 von Bogdandy A, Antpoehler C, Ioannidis M (2017) Protecting EU values: reverse Solange and the rule of law framework. In: Jakab A, Kochenov D (eds) The enforcement of EU law and values: ensuring Member States’ compliance. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 218–233
Zurück zum Zitat Zinonos P (2023) Identité(s) transnationale (s) de l’Union européenne, Analyse juridique pour un système de protection effective des droits. Bruylant, Brussels Zinonos P (2023) Identité(s) transnationale (s) de l’Union européenne, Analyse juridique pour un système de protection effective des droits. Bruylant, Brussels
Metadaten
Titel
The Charter of Fundamental Rights in the Case Law of the ECJ: The Significance and Decisive Advantages of a Functional Approach
verfasst von
Marek Safjan
Copyright-Jahr
2024
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-52685-5_2

Premium Partner