Piet Eeckhout
KlimaSeniorinnen has established a remedy which, in EU law, is not easy to locate and may actually be unavailable in light of restrictive CJEU case law. Whatever one’s views on this restrictive case law, it is a fact that the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights now obliges the CJEU to do as much as it can to accommodate the KlimaSeniorinnen remedy and to interpret the relevant TFEU provisions flexibly. One may assume that, sooner or later, the CJEU will be confronted with a KlimaSeniorinnen claim. If the CJEU were to declare such a claim inadmissible, it will put itself in the corner of courts refusing to engage with climate change policies. That would be unfortunate for a court that has long been at the forefront of legal progress.
Continue reading >>
Pielpa Ollikainen
On June 21, the General Court handed down its order in T-628/22 René Repasi v the European Commission. Repasi had challenged the validity of the Commission Delegated Regulation 2022/1214, a complementary taxonomy regulation on nuclear energy and natural gas. The General Court dismissed the action due to lack of standing. To surmount the notoriously strict standing requirements before the CJEU, Repasi relied on his position as a Member of Parliament (MEP) and argued that a claim of a wrong choice of the legal basis that leads to deviation from the ordinary legislative procedure (OLP) gives an MEP standing before the EU courts. The difficulties that MEPs encounter while fulfilling their legislative responsibilities make Repasi’s argument appealing. However, creating a new semi-privileged standing category through the Union courts could also present its own set of difficulties.
Continue reading >>
Christoph Krenn
On 10 October 2022, René Repasi, a member of the European Parliament, brought a case against the European Commission before the EU General Court. The key question of the case is procedural: Does an individual MEP have standing to claim before the Court that an EU act has been based on the wrong legal basis, if the choice of legal basis affects an MEP’s participatory rights. If Mr. Repasi succeeds, his case could significantly strengthen the Court’s role in protecting the rights of the minority in the European Parliament. It could introduce a new type of player to EU institutional legal battles – the MEP – and establish a sort of Organstreitverfahren for individual MEPs.
Continue reading >>
Merijn Chamon, Mariolina Eliantonio, Annalisa Volpato
On 10 October 2022 MEP René Repasi lodged an action for annulment against the complementary taxonomy delegated regulation 2022/1214. The same regulation is also challenged by Austria, a privileged applicant under Article 263 TFEU. This post focuses on the issue which MEP Repasi himself has noted is the most innovative of his action, namely the question whether an individual MEP has special legal standing to challenge an act (of the Commission) that affects how that MEP fulfils his parliamentary function.
Continue reading >>
Tom Boekestein
On Sunday, 28 August 2022, four major associations of European judges announced that they would challenge the Council’s Decision of 17 June that releases funds to Poland to help it recover from the COVID-19 pandemic. The four associations are seeking to prevent the release of recovery funds to Poland until it has complied with the Court’s judgments in full. Whether their action has any chance of success will depend on how the Court applies the long-standing Plaumann criteria.
Continue reading >>