Odbor kompatibility s právem ES Úřad vlády ČR	I S A P Informační Systém pro Aproximaci Práva
	Databáze č. 17 : Databáze judikatury

ă Odbor kompatibility s právem ES, Úřad vlády ČR - určeno pouze pro potřebu ministerstev a ostatních ústředních orgánů


	Číslo (Kód CELEX): Number (CELEX Code):		61992V0001

	Název: Title:		OPINION OF THE COURT OF 10 APRIL 1992. OPINION DELIVERED PURSUANT TO THE SECOND SUBPARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 228(1) OF THE EEC TREATY. DRAFT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY, ON THE ONE HAND, AND THE COUNTRIES OF THE EUROPEAN FREE TRADE ASSOCIATION, ON THE OTHER, RELATING TO THE CREATION OF THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA. OPINION 1/92.

	Publikace: Publication:		REPORTS OF CASES 1992 PAGES I-2821

	Předmět (klíčová slova): Keywords		EXTERNAL RELATIONS;ASSOCIATION;PROVISIONS GOVERNING THE INSTITUTIONS;

	Související předpisy: Corresponding acts:

	Odkaz na souvisejicí judikáty: Corresponding Judgements:


	Plný text: Fulltext:		Ne

Fakta:

Názor soudu a komentář:

Shrnutí (Summary of the Judgment):
1. IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THE MOST UNIFORM INTERPRETATION POSSIBLE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT CREATING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA AND THOSE OF COMMUNITY LAW WHOSE SUBSTANCE IS INCORPORATED IN THE AGREEMENT, ARTICLE 105 OF THE AGREEMENT EMPOWERS THE JOINT COMMITTEE, COMPOSED OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES, TO KEEP UNDER CONSTANT REVIEW THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CASE-LAW OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES AND OF THE COURT OF THE EUROPEAN FREE TRADE ASSOCIATION AND TO ACT SO AS TO PRESERVE THE HOMOGENEOUS INTERPRETATION OF THE AGREEMENT. IF POWER ENABLED THE JOINT COMMITTEE TO DISREGARD THE BINDING NATURE OF DECISIONS OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE WITHIN THE COMMUNITY LEGAL ORDER, THE VESTING OF SUCH A POWER IN THE JOINT COMMITTEE WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT THE AUTONOMY OF THE COMMUNITY LEGAL ORDER, RESPECT FOR WHICH MUST BE ASSURED BY THE COURT PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 164 OF THE EEC TREATY, AND WOULD BE INCOMPATIBLE WITH THAT TREATY. HOWEVER, ACCORDING TO THE "PROCŐS-VERBAL AGRÉÉ AD ARTICLE
105", DECISIONS TAKEN BY THE JOINT COMMITTEE UNDER THAT ARTICLE ARE NOT TO AFFECT THE CASE-LAW OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE. CONSEQUENTLY, THE POWER WHICH ARTICLE 105 OF THE AGREEMENT CREATING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA CONFERS ON THE JOINT COMMITTEE FOR THE PURPOSES OF PRESERVING THE HOMOGENEOUS INTERPRETATION OF THE AGREEMENT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE EEC TREATY ONLY IF THAT PRINCIPLE, WHICH IS AN ESSENTIAL SAFEGUARD INDISPENSABLE FOR THE AUTONOMY OF THE COMMUNITY LEGAL ORDER, IS LAID DOWN IN A FORM BINDING ON THE CONTRACTING PARTIES.

2. UNDER ARTICLE 111 OF THE AGREEMENT CREATING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA, THE JOINT COMMITTEE IS EMPOWERED TO SETTLE ANY DISPUTE BROUGHT BEFORE IT BY THE COMMUNITY OR A STATE OF THE EUROPEAN FREE TRADE ASSOCIATION ON THE INTERPRETATION OR APPLICATION OF THE AGREEMENT, INCLUDING, PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 105(3), DISPUTES RELATING TO A DIFFERENCE IN CASE-LAW WHICH THE COMMITTEE HAS BEEN UNABLE TO SETTLE UNDER THE PROCEDURE LAID DOWN IN ARTICLE 105. SINCE THE ATTRIBUTION OF SUCH A POWER RAISES THE PROBLEM AS TO WHETHER THE JOINT COMMITTEE MAY DISREGARD THE BINDING NATURE OF DECISIONS OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE WITHIN THE COMMUNITY LEGAL ORDER, IT IS TO BE NOTED THAT ARTICLE 105(3) ESTABLISHES A LINK BETWEEN THE PROCEDURE PROVIDED FOR IN THAT ARTICLE AND THAT PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 111 OF THE AGREEMENT, AND THAT, BECAUSE OF THAT LINK, THOSE TWO PROVISIONS MUST BE INTERPRETED SYSTEMATICALLY AND CONSISTENTLY. SUCH AN INTERPRETATION NECESSARILY IMPLIES THAT THE PRINCIPLE SET OUT IN THE "PROCŐS-VERBAL AGRÉÉ AD ARTICLE 105"
, ACCORDING TO WHICH DECISIONS TAKEN BY THE JOINT COMMITTEE PURSUANT TO THAT PROVISION ARE NOT TO AFFECT THE CASE-LAW OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE, WILL ALSO APPLY WHERE THE JOINT COMMITTEE TRIES TO SETTLE A DISPUTE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 111 BY FINDING A SOLUTION ACCEPTABLE TO THE CONTRACTING PARTIES. THAT INTERPRETATION IS MOREOVER THE ONLY INTERPRETATION THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE JURISDICTION TO INTERPRET THE RELEVANT RULES CONFERRED ON THE COURT OF JUSTICE BY ARTICLE 111(3) WHERE THE DISPUTE RELATES TO THE INTERPRETATION OF PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT THAT ARE SUBSTANTIVELY IDENTICAL TO THE CORRESPONDING RULES OF COMMUNITY LAW. IT FOLLOWS THAT THE POWERS WHICH ARTICLE 111 OF THE AGREEMENT CREATING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA CONFERS ON THE JOINT COMMITTEE DO NOT CALL IN QUESTION THE BINDING NATURE OF THE CASE-LAW OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OR THE AUTONOMY OF THE COMMUNITY LEGAL ORDER, SINCE IT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED THAT THE PRINCIPLE SET OUT IN THE "PROCŐS-VERBAL AGRÉÉ AD ARTICLE 105" BINDS THE CONTRACTING PA
RTIES.

3. ARTICLE 111(3) OF THE AGREEMENT CREATING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA CONFERS ON THE COURT OF JUSTICE, IN THE EVENT OF DISPUTES RELATING TO THE INTERPRETATION OF PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT THAT ARE SUBSTANTIVELY IDENTICAL TO THE CORRESPONDING RULES OF COMMUNITY LAW, JURISDICTION TO INTERPRET THE RELEVANT RULES. ALTHOUGH THE POWERS CONFERRED ON THE COURT OF JUSTICE BY THE EEC TREATY MAY BE MODIFIED PURSUANT ONLY TO THE PROCEDURE PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 236 OF THE TREATY, AN INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT CONCLUDED BY THE COMMUNITY MAY CONFER NEW POWERS ON THE COURT, SUCH AS THE POWER TO INTERPRET THE PROVISIONS OF SUCH AGREEMENT, PROVIDED THAT IN SO DOING IT DOES NOT CHANGE THE NATURE OF THE FUNCTION OF THE COURT AS CONCEIVED IN THE EEC TREATY, NAMELY THAT OF A COURT WHOSE DECISIONS ARE BINDING. IT IS TRUE THAT THE AIM OF REQUESTING A RULING FROM THE COURT OF JUSTICE PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 111(3) OF THE AGREEMENT IS NOT TO ENTRUST THE COURT WITH THE SETTLEMENT OF THE DISPUTE, WHICH CONTINUES TO BE THE RESPONSIBILITY O
F THE JOINT COMMITTEE. NEVERTHELESS, THE INTERPRETATION TO BE GIVEN BY THE COURT OF JUSTICE IS BINDING, AS IS CLEAR FROM THE VERY WORDING OF THE AGREEMENT. IT FOLLOWS THAT, IF THE COURT IS CALLED UPON TO GIVE A RULING PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 111(3) OF THE AGREEMENT CREATING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA, THE CONTRACTING PARTIES AND THE JOINT COMMITTEE ALIKE WILL BE BOUND BY THE COURT' S INTERPRETATION OF THE RULES AT ISSUE. CONSEQUENTLY, THE JURISDICTION CONFERRED ON THE COURT BY THAT PROVISION FOR THE PURPOSES OF INTERPRETING THE PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT AT THE REQUEST OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE EEC TREATY.

4. THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES BY ARBITRATION, PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 111(4) OF THE AGREEMENT CREATING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA, IS NOT LIABLE ADVERSELY TO AFFECT THE AUTONOMY OF THE COMMUNITY LEGAL ORDER, SINCE UNDER THE VERY TERMS OF THAT PROVISION NO QUESTION OF INTERPRETATION OF PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT WHICH ARE IDENTICAL TO PROVISIONS OF COMMUNITY LAW MAY BE DEALT WITH BY SUCH ARBITRATION PROCEDURES.

5. UNDER ARTICLE 107 OF THE AGREEMENT CREATING THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA, STATES BELONGING TO THE EUROPEAN FREE TRADE ASSOCIATION MAY AUTHORIZE THEIR COURTS TO REQUEST THE COURT OF JUSTICE TO DECIDE ON THE INTERPRETATION OF A PROVISION OF THE AGREEMENT. IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE WORDING OF THAT PROVISION ENSURES THAT THE ANSWERS WHICH THE COURT OF JUSTICE MAY BE CALLED UPON TO GIVE WILL BE BINDING, THAT MECHANISM RESPECTS THE OPERATION OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE AND SATISFIES THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOUND FUNCTIONING OF THE PROCEDURE FOR REQUESTS FOR PRELIMINARY RULINGS AND IS THEREFORE COMPATIBLE WITH COMMUNITY LAW.

6. THE COMMUNITY' S AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS ARISES NOT ONLY FROM AN EXPRESS ATTRIBUTION BY THE EEC TREATY, BUT ALSO FROM OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE TREATY AND MEASURES TAKEN PURSUANT TO THOSE PROVISIONS BY THE COMMUNITY INSTITUTIONS. CONSEQUENTLY, THE COMMUNITY IS EMPOWERED, UNDER THE COMPETITION RULES IN THE EEC TREATY AND MEASURES IMPLEMENTING THOSE RULES, TO CONCLUDE INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS IN THIS FIELD. THAT POWER NECESSARILY IMPLIES THAT THE COMMUNITY MAY ACCEPT RULES MADE BY VIRTUE OF AN AGREEMENT AS TO THE SHARING OF THE RESPECTIVE COMPETENCES OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES IN THE FIELD OF COMPETITION, PROVIDED THAT THOSE RULES DO NOT CHANGE THE NATURE OF THE POWERS OF THE COMMUNITY AND OF ITS INSTITUTIONS AS CONCEIVED IN THE EEC TREATY. DOC : 1992/04/10; LODGED : 1992/02/27; JURCIT : 691V0001 : N 1 17 33 157E164 : N 22 157E236 : N 32 157E177 : N 37 670J0022 : N 39 676J0003 : N 39 676V0001 : N 39 SUB : E
XTERNAL RELATIONS; ASSOCIATION; PROVISIONS GOVERNING THE INSTITUTIONS; AUTLANG : FRENCH; GERMAN; ITALIAN; DUTCH; ENGLISH; DANISH; GREEK; SPANISH; PORTUGUESE; APPLICA : COMMISSION; NOTES : BRACKE, NIELS: NEDERLANDS JURISTENBLAD 1992 P.798-799 GAUDISSART, MARC-ANDRÉ: REVUE DU MARCHÉ UNIQUE EUROPÉEN 1992 P.121-136 DUTHEIL DE LA ROCHŐRE, JACQUELINE: REVUE DU MARCHÉ COMMUN 1992 P.603-612 BLECKMANN, ALBERT: JURISTENZEITUNG 1992 P.792-793 BOULOUIS, JEAN: REVUE TRIMESTRIELLE DE DROIT EUROPÉEN 1992 P.457-463 EPINEY, ASTRID: SCHWEIZERISCHE ZEITSCHRIFT FUER INTERNATIONALES UND EUROPAEISCHES RECHT 1992 P.275-304 SCHERMERS, HENRY G.: COMMON MARKET LAW REVIEW 1992 P.991-1009 HARTLEY, TREVOR C.: INTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVE LAW QUARTERLY 1992 P.841-848 BRANDTNER, BARBARA: EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW / JOURNAL EUROPÉEN DE DROIT INTERNAT
IONAL 1992 VOL.3 N| 2 P.300-328 LANG, ALESSANDRA: DIRITTO DEL COMMERCIO INTERNAZIONALE 1992 P.575-599 BARENTS, RENÉ: RIVISTA DI DIRITTO EUROPEO 1992 P.751-767 BURROWS, NOREEN: EUROPEAN LAW REVIEW 1993 P.63-66 BIERWAGEN, RAINER M.; HULL, DAVID W.: AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW 1993 P.117-128 VALLE GALVEZ, ALEJANDRO: REVISTA DE INSTITUCIONES EUROPEAS 1993 P.155-193 AUVRET-FINCK, JOSIANE: CAHIERS DE DROIT EUROPÉEN 1993 P.38-59 DA CRUZ VILAÇA, JOSÉ LUőS; PIÇARRA, NUNO: CAHIERS DE DROIT EUROPÉEN 1993 P.3-37 BRANDTNER, BARBARA; FOLZ, HANS-PETER: EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW / JOURNAL EUROPÉEN DE DROIT INTERNATIONAL 1993 VOL.4 N| 3 P.436-438 POZZATO, MARCOVALERIO: DOCUMENTI GIUSTIZIA 1993 N| 11 COL.1991-2004 BARENTS, RENÉ: THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA EC-EFTA. EUROPEAN MONOGRAPHS (ED. KLUWER - DE
VENTER) 1994 VOL.7 P.57-71 TRAVERS, NOEL: IRISH JOURNAL OF EUROPEAN LAW 1994 VOL.3 P.74-91 TUFANO, MARIA LUISA: DIRITTO COMUNITARIO E DEGLI SCAMBI INTERNAZIONALI 1994 P.759-790 RODRőGUEZ VAZQUEZ, MARőA ANGELES: NOTICIAS DE LA UNION EUROPEA 1995 N| 126 P.53-65 PROCEDU : REQUEST FOR AN OPINION (228 EEC) - AGREEMENT COMPATIBLE; JUDGRAP : KAPTEYN DATES : OF DOCUMENT.......: 10/04/1992 OF APPLICATION....: 27/02/1992 ............... END OF DOCUMENT ............... =============================================================================== (C) 1995 THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES. THIS TEXT MAY ONLY BE REPRODUCED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TERMS

Plný text judikátu (Entire text of the Judgment):