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):		61988J0002

	Název: Title:		ECJ Judgment of 13 July 1990 Case C-2/88 Imm. J. J. Zwartveld and others Request for judicial cooperation [1990] ECR I-3365

	Publikace: Publication:

	Předmět (klíčová slova): Keywords

	Související předpisy: Corresponding acts:		Case 6/64 Costa v ENEL [1964] ECR 585 Case 294/83 Les Verts v European Parliament [1986] ECR 1357 Case 68/88 Commission v Greece [1989] ECR 2965 Case 230/81 Luxembourg v European Parliament [1983] ECR 255 Case 1/88 SA Générale de Banque v Commission [1989] ECR 857

	Odkaz na souvisejicí judikáty: Corresponding Judgements:


	Plný text: Fulltext:		Ne

Fakta:
The
Rechter-commissaris
, a Dutch judicial committee, investigated charges against Dutch nationals for forgery which was punishable under the Netherlands Penal Code and which related to an alleged black fish market, in breach of the national provisions adopted to implement the Community rules on fishing quotas.
Because its request to the Commission for inspection reports collected by EEC officials and for the possibility to take evidence from the inspectors concerned was turned down, the
Rechter-commissaris
submitted to the Court a ”request for judicial cooperation” in which it asked the Court to give the necessary orders referring to Articles 1 and 12 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities
Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities, Annex to the Treaty establishing a Single Council and Single Commission of the European Communities of 8 April 1965 (hereinafter the “Protocol” (OJ 1967 L 126, p. 16)
in conjunction with the European convention or conventions on mutual assistance, which, even though the Communities were not a party to them, are incorporated in the Community legal order and must be regarded as an integral part of Community law.
The Commission on the other hand insisted that the Protocol would prevent the disclosure of any documents which are for internal use only and that the Protocol would not contain any exceptions to this rule. The interviewing of EEC officials was also rejected by the Commission which claimed that they enjoyed immunity, which was necessary to avoid any negative effects on the work and effectiveness of Community supervision and that the Protocol provided no exception which would allow request either.

Názor soudu a komentář:
”Relations between Member States and the Community institutions are governed, according to Article 5 of the EEC Treaty, by a principle of sincere cooperation. (...) This duty of sincere cooperation imposed on the Community institutions is of particular importance vis-ŕ-vis the judicial authorities of the Member States, who are responsible for ensuring that Community law is applied and respected in the national legal system.”
The Court bases this ruling on the fact that the Community is based on the rule of law (cf. Case 294/83 Les Verts v European Parliament [1986]ECR 1357) and that the EEC Treaty has created its own legal system which became an integral part of the legal systems of the Member States (cf. Case 6&64 Costa v ENEL [1964] ECR 585).
Therefore, it is the duty of all Community institutions to provide any assistance possible to a Member State’s organ which, in fulfilling the obligation to guarantee the application and effectiveness of Community law (cf. Case 68/88 Commission v Greece [1989] ECR 2965, at paragraph 23), institutes criminal procedures (cf. Case 230/81 Luxembourg v European Parliament [1983] ECR 255, paragraph 37).
According to the Court, the regulations of the Protocol cannot, therefore, be construed in a way that they constitute an obstacle to that obligation of mutual and sincere cooperation. On the contrary, the law on immunities and privileges is of ”functional and therefore relative character, being intended to avoid any interference with the functioning and independence of the Communities” (cf. Case C-1/88 SA Générale de Banque v Commission [1989] ECR 857, paragraph 9).
The Community institutions, and especially the Commission (due to Article 155 of the EEC Treaty) are consequently obliged to actively assist a national court hearing proceedings on the infringement of Community rules by producing documents and authorizing its officials to give evidence in the national court’s hearings.
Addressing the question of admissibility of the ”request for judicial cooperation”, which was challenged by the Commission, the Court states that it has the obligation under Article 164 to ensure that the law is observed in the interpretation and application of the Treaty. Therefore, it must have the power to review whether the duty of cooperation has been fulfilled. For this purpose a legal procedure appropriate to that particular end must be available. Thereby the Court adds another element to the comprehensive judicial system established by the EEC Treaty.

Shrnutí (Summary of the Judgment):

Plný text judikátu (Entire text of the Judgment):