Public Law Studies Quarterly

The Responsibility of Members and Institutions of the European Union due to Inaction in the Case Law of the Court of Justice of the European Union

Document Type : Article

Authors

Ali Ahadi Karnagh 1
Abbasali Kadkhodaee 2

1 Assistant Professor of International Law, Farabi School of Law, University of Tehran, Qom, Iran

2 Professor, Public and International Law Department, Faculty of Law and Political Sciences, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22059/jplsq.2022.338559.3025
Abstract
The European Union is the only international organization that has established specific rules and regulations regarding the responsibility of its members and institutions due to inaction. In this context, two types of inaction lawsuits are brought before the judicial authorities of the EU; the first type involves lawsuits against the member states of the Union, which can be further divided into two categories. The first category consists of lawsuits initiated by the European Commission against the states for inaction, while the second category includes lawsuits brought by member states against each other. The second type of inaction lawsuits is directed against the institutions of the European Union. In both types of lawsuits, the claimant must grant a deadline to the state or the Union institutions to fulfill their obligations or respond, and if there is no response, the claimant can file a lawsuit against the defendant. In lawsuits against the institutions of the European Union, unlike inaction lawsuits against the states, both natural and legal persons have the right to file inaction lawsuits against the Union institutions. After the lawsuit is filed, the European Court of Justice obliges the state or institution that has committed the inaction to fulfill its obligations.

Keywords

European Union
failure to act
European Commission
European Court Of Justice
Subjects

  1. English

    1. A) Books
    2. Berry, E., Homewood, M. J., & Bogusz, B. (2019). Complete EU Law. Text, Cases, and Materials, Oxford University Press.
    3. Borchardt, K.-D. (2017). The ABC of EU law. Directorate-General for Communication (European Commission).
    4. Chalmers, D., Davies, G., & Monti, G. (2010). European Union Law: Cases and Materials(2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    5. Cremona, M. (2012). Compliance and the Enforcement of EU Law. Oxford University
    6. Fairhurst, J. (2016). Law of the European Union. Eleventh edition, New York: Pearson.
    7. Guastaferro, B. (2018). Sincere Cooperation and respect for national Identity. In (eds) Oxford Principles of European Union Law, Vol. 1, Schutze, Robert; Tridimas, Takis, Oxford University Press.
    8. Horspool M, Humphreys MJ, & Wells-Greco M. (2012). European Union law. Tenth edition., Oxford University Press, United Kingdom.
    9. Klamert, M. (2014). The principle of Loyalty in EU law, Oxford University
    10. Lenaerts, K., Maselis, I,, Gutman, K., & Tomasz Nowak, J. (2014). EU Procedural Law, Oxford University Press.
    11. Stegmann, P. T. (2019). Responsibility of the EU and the Member States under EU International investment protection agreement. Springer.

     

    1. B) Articles
    2. Patrin, M. (July 7, 2018). The Legal Nature of the Principle of Colegiality: A General Principle of EU Law? CERiM Online Paper No. 11/2018, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3209863 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3209863

     

    1. C) Documents
    2. Treaty of European Union, 2009.
    3. Treaty of Functioning of European Union, 1958.
    4. Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union, 2012.

     

    1. D) Judgements of the ECJ
    2. Judgment of the ECJ (2 February 1988). Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium, Case 293/85, Case 293/85, European Court Reports 1988 -00305.
    3. Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Second Chamber, extended composition) (22 May 1996). Associazione Italiana Tecnico Economica del Cemento (AITEC) v Commission of the European Communities, Case T-277/94.
    4. Order of the Court of First Instance (26 November 1996). kuchlenz- winterv.council, case T-167/95.
    5. Judgment of the ECJ (25 September 2003).PSchlüsselverlag J.S. Moser and Others v Commission, Case C-170/02
    6. Order of General Court (6 September 2011). Mugraby v Council and Commission II-255, Case T-292/09.
    7. Judgment of the General Court (2011). Ryanair v Commission, Case T-442/07 .
    8. Judgment of the ECJ (17 November 1992). Commission Greece, Case 105/91.
    9. Judgment of the ECJ) 10 July 1990) .Commission Germany, Case 217/88.
    10. judgment of the ECJ (14 April 2011). Commission v Romania, Case 522/09.
    11. Judgment of the ECJ (15 October 2009). Audiolux SA and Others Groupe Bruxelles Lambert SA (GBL) and Others, Bertelsmann AG and Others, Case 101/08.
    12. Judgment of the ECJ (15 October 2015). Commission v Greece, C-167/14.
    13. Judgment of the ECJ (16 September 2015).Commission Slovak Republic, C-433/13.
    14. Judgment of the ECJ (18 June 1991), ERTAE, on the interpretation of the EEC Treaty, in particular Articles 2, 3(f), 9, 30, 36, 85 and 86, C-260/89.
    15. judgment of the ECJ (18 October 2018). Commission v Romania, C‑301/17, not published, EU:C:2018:846.
    16. Judgment of the ECJ (21 January 2010). European Commission v Federal Republic of Germany, C-546/07.
    17. Judgment of the ECJ (21 March 2019). European Commission v Italian Republic, C-498/17.
    18. Judgment of the ECJ (22 February 2018). European Commission v Hellenic Republic, C-328/16.
    19. Judgment of the ECJ (22 March 1994). Commission v Spain, C-375/92.
    20. Judgment of the ECJ (28 March 2019), Commission Ireland, ECLI:EU:C:2019:269.
    21. Judgment of the ECJ (29 September 1998). Commission Germany, C-191/95 .
    22. Judgment of the ECJ (4 July 2018) .Commission v. Slovak Republic , C-626/16.
    23. Judgment of the ECJ (7 September 2016). Commission v Greece, C-584/14.
    24. Judgment of the ECJ (19 November 2013). European Commission v Council of the European Union, C‑196/12.
    25. Judgment of the ECJ (23 November 2017) .Bionorica SE and Diapharm GmbH & Co. KG v European Commission. Joined Cases C-596/15 P and C-597/15.
    26. Judgment of the ECJ (13 November 1964). Commission v. Luxembourg and Belgium. - Joined cases 90/63 and 91/63. 
    27. Judgment of the General Court (11 December 2014). Heli-Flight GmbH & Co. KG v European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). T‑102/13.
    28. Judgments of the ECJ (28 March 1985). Commission v Italy, 274/83.
    29. Order of the General Court (24 June 2016). Onix Asigurări SA v European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA). Case T-590/15.

     

    References In Persian:

    - Articles

    1. Abedini, A. (2017). The special regime of the EU: Features and consequences, Journal of Public Law Studies Quarterly, 47(4), 957-977 (In Persian).
Public Law Studies Quarterly
Volume 55, Issue 3 - Serial Number 43
Autumn 2025
Autumn 2025
Pages 1505-1527

  • Receive Date 04 February 2022
  • Revise Date 14 March 2022
  • Accept Date 18 April 2022

Home

Journal Process Ethics

Peer Review Process

Submission

Indexing and Abstracting

Contact Us