Sufficiently Serious Breach and Legitimate Expectations in European Union Non-Contractual Liability: Doctrinal Clarification and Case-Mapping
Roč.34,č.2(2026)
Časopis pro právní vědu a praxi
Jitka Matějková
Ondřej Pavelek
Hana Kelblová
This article examines the threshold of a sufficiently serious breach within the European Union’s noncontractual liability, focusing exclusively on public authorities – European Union institutions (Articles 268 and 340 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union) and Member States under the Francovich/Brasserie–Factortame line of case-law. It clarifies the relationship between a sufficiently serious breach and the principle of legitimate expectations (as an expression of legal certainty) and distinguishes this principle from the Charter right to good administration (Article 41), which primarily binds European Union bodies. The analysis is guided by two questions: (1) how the Court of Justice has defined and refined SSB across leading judgments; and (2) which criteria it applies when determining whether the threshold is met. Methodologically, the study offers a structured, caseanchored framework that consolidates and systematises the Court’s factors into a five-step test: clarity and precision of the rule; scope of administrative or policy discretion; excusability and complexity; persistence in the face of settled case-law or binding judgments; and systemic or institutional contribution. A mapped set of judgments, supported by short case studies, demonstrates how the test operates across domains and highlights points of alignment and divergence between Union and State liability (including the Bergaderm convergence and the stricter standard for judicial breaches in Köbler). The findings confirm that annulment is not, by itself, sufficient to establish liability; rather, the sufficiently serious breach turns on a context-sensitive assessment of discretion and institutional conduct. By integrating dispersed jurisprudence into an operational test and clarifying the interface with annulment actions, the article enhances predictability for courts and claimants and provides practical guidance for pleading and adjudication in European Union damages actions.
Sufficiently serious breach of law; damage compensation; non-contractual liability; Court of Justice of the European Union; legitimate expectations
443–468
Articles and Books
AALTO, Pekka. Public Liability in EU Law: Brasserie, Bergaderm and Beyond. Modern Studies in European Law. London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2011.
BOBEK, M. The effects of EU law in the national legal systems. In: BARNARD, C. and PEERS, S., eds. European Union Law. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020, pp. 154–190.
BRAND, O. Schadenersatzrecht. München: C.H. Beck, 2010, p. 98.
COLCELLI, V. Understanding of the built of European Union legal system: The function of individual rights. Journal of Social Sciences, 2012, vol. 8, no. 3.
DAVIES, A. State liability for judicial decisions in European Union and international law. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 2012, vol. 61, no. 3. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
FINK, M. EU liability for contributions to Member States’ breaches of EU law. Common Market Law Review, 2019, vol. 56, no. 5.
HOFMANN, H. and MIHAESCU, C. The relation between the Charter's fundamental rights and the unwritten general principles of EU law: Good administration as the test case. European Constitutional Law Review, 2013, vol. 9, pp. 73–101.
LOCK, T. Is private enforcement of EU law through state liability a myth? An assessment 20 years after Francovich. Common Market Law Review, 2012, vol. 49.
LUND, D.S. The Fosen-Linjen saga – A Norwegian perspective. European Procurement and Public Private Partnership Law Review, 2019, vol. 14, no. 4.
POTACS, M. and MAYER, C. Changes in Austrian state liability law under the influence of European law. European Public Law, 2013, vol. 19, pp. 51–60.
SANCHEZ-GRAELLS, A. The EFTA Court’s Fosen-Linjen saga on procurement damages: A there and back again walk. European Procurement and Public Private Partnership Law Review, 2019, vol. 14, no. 4.
THANOU, S. Individual restrictive measures and actions for damages before the General Court of the European Union. ERA Forum, 2020, vol. 20, pp. 599–614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12027-019-00592-8.
VORNICU, R. The sufficiently serious breach test in action. Damages in procurement law and a tale of three courts: The CJEU, the UK Supreme Court and the EFTA Court. European Public Law, 2019, vol. 25, no. 4. Available at: https://kluwerlawonline.com/journalarticle/European+Public+Law/25.4/EURO2019032.
Case Law
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. European Ombudsman v Frank Lamberts (C-234/02 P). Judgment of 23 March 2004. ECLI:EU:C: 2004:174.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Andrea Francovich and Danila Bonifaci and Others v Italian Republic (C-6/90 and C-9/90). Judgment of 19 November 1991. ECLI:EU:C: 1991:428.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Brasserie du Pêcheur SA v Bundesrepublik Deutschland and The Queen v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte: Factortame Ltd and Others (C-46/93 and C-48/93). Judgment of 5 March 1996. ECLI:EU:C:1996:79.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Jutta Leth v Republik Österreich, Land Niederösterreich (C-420/11). Judgment of 14 March 2013. ECLI:EU:C:2013:166.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Industrial Química del Nalón, SA v European Commission (T-635/18). Judgment of 16 December 2020. ECLI:EU:T:2020:624.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Printeos, SA v European Commission (T-201/17). Judgment of 12 February 2019. ECLI:EU:T:2019:81.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. European Commission v Printeos, SA (C-301/19 P). Judgment of 20 January 2021. ECLI:EU:C:2021:39.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Bank Refah Kargaran v Council of the European Union (C-134/19 P). Judgment of 6 October 2020. ECLI:EU:C:2020:793.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. European Ombudsman v Claire Staelen (C-337/15 P). Judgment of 4 April 2017. ECLI:EU:C:2017:256.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Thomas Specht and Others v Land Berlin and Bundesrepublik Deutschland (C-501/12 to C-506/12, C-540/12 and C-541/12). Judgment of 19 June 2014. ECLI:EU:C:2014:2005.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Der Grüne Punkt – Duales System Deutschland v Commission (C-385/07 P). Judgment of 16 July 2009. ECLI:EU:C:2009:456.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Kendrion NV v European Union, represented by the Court of Justice of the European Union (T-479/14). Judgment of 1 February 2017. ECLI:EU:T:2017:48.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Sigma Orionis SA v European Commission (T-48/16). Judgment of 3 May 2018. ECLI:EU:T:2018:245.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Post Bank Iran v Council of the European Union (T-559/15). Judgment of 6 September 2018. ECLI:EU:T:2018:948.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Frank Steinhoff and Others v European Central Bank (T-107/17). Judgment of 23 May 2019. ECLI:EU:T:2019:353.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. HTTS Hanseatic Trade Trust & Shipping GmbH v Council of the European Union (C-123/18 P). Judgment of 10 September 2019. ECLI:EU:C:2019:694.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Ilona Baradics and Others v QBE Insurance (Europe) Ltd Magyarországi Fióktelepe and Magyar Állam (C-430/13). Judgment of 16 January 2014. ECLI:EU:C:2014:32.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Test Claimants in the FII Group Litigation v Commissioners of Inland Revenue (C-446/04). Judgment of 12 December 2006. ECLI:EU:C:2006:774.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Gerhard Köbler v Republik Österreich (C-224/01). Judgment of 30 September 2003. ECLI:EU:C:2003:513.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Evropaïki Dynamiki – Proigmena Systimata Tilepikoinonion Pliroforikis kai Tilematikis AE v European Commission (T-297/12). Judgment of 26 September 2014. EU:T:2014:888 (unpublished).
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Gap SA granen & producten NV v European Commission (T-437/10). Judgment of 16 May 2013. EU:T:2013:249.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Cofradía de pescadores de "San Pedro" de Bermeo and Others v Council of the European Union (T-415/03). Judgment of 19 October 2005. EU:T:2005:365.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Hochtief Solutions AG Magyarországi Fióktelepe v Fővárosi Törvényszék (C-620/17). Judgment of 29 July 2019. ECLI:EU:C:2019:625.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Jose Maria Sison v Council of the European Union (T-341/07). Judgment of 26 April 2011. EU:T:2011:687.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Jose Maria Sison v Council of the European Union (T-110/03). Judgment of 26 April 2005. EU:T:2005:143.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Laurent Gbagbo v Council of the European Union (T-348/11). Judgment of 23 April 2013. ECLI:EU:T:2013:216.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION (Grand Chamber). Laurent Gbagbo and Others v Council of the European Union (Joined Cases C-478/11 P to C-482/11 P). Judgment of 23 April 2013. ECLI:EU:C:2013:258.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Vakakis kai Synergates – Symvouloi gia Agrotiki Anaptixi AE Meleton (formerly Vakakis International – Symvouloi gia Agrotiki Anaptixi AE) v European Commission (T-292/15). Judgment of 28 February 2018. ECLI:EU:T:2019:84.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. I. Schroeder KG (GmbH & Co.) v Council of the European Union and European Commission (T-205/14). Judgment of 23 September 2015. ECLI:EU:T:2015:673.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Vans, Inc. v European Union Intellectual Property Office (C-123/19 P). Judgment of 15 October 2019. ECLI:EU:C:2019:1088.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Agraz, SA and Others v Commission of the European Communities (C-243/05 P). Judgment of 9 November 2006. ECLI:EU:C:2006:708.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Acquafarm, SL v European Commission (T-458/16). Judgment of 16 November 2017. EU:T:2017:810.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Schindler Holding Ltd and Others v European Commission (C-501/11 P). Judgment of 18 July 2013. ECLI:EU:C:2013:522.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami and Others v European Commission (C-398/13 P). Judgment of 3 September 2015. ECLI:EU:C:2015:535.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Holcim (Deutschland) AG v Commission of the European Communities (C-282/05 P). Judgment of 19 April 2007. ECLI:EU:C:2007:226.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Laboratoires pharmaceutiques Bergaderm SA and Jean-Jacques Goupil v Commission of the European Communities (C-352/98 P). Judgment of 4 July 2000. ECLI:EU:C:2000:361.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Commission of the European Communities v Fresh Marine Company A/S (C-472/00 P). Judgment of 10 July 2003. ECLI:EU:C:2003:399.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Artegodan GmbH v European Commission (T-429/05). Judgment of 26 January 2010. EU:T:2010:60.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Industrial Química del Nalón, SA v European Commission (T-635/18). Judgment of 16 December 2020. ECLI:EU:T:2020:624.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Union syndicale fédérale des services publics européens et internationaux (USFSPEI) v European Parliament and Council of the European Union (T-75/14). Judgment of 16 November 2017. ECLI:EU:T:2017:813.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. MyTravel Group plc v Commission of the European Communities (T-212/03). Judgment of 9 September 2008. ECLI:EU:T:2008:315.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Holcim (Romania) SA v European Commission (T-317/12). Judgment of 18 September 2014. ECLI:EU:T:2014:782.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. The Test Claimants in the CFC and Dividend Group Litigation v Commissioners of Inland Revenue (C-201/05). Judgment of 23 April 2008. ECLI:EU:C:2008:239.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Test Claimants in the Thin Cap Group Litigation v Commissioners of Inland Revenue (C-524/04). Judgment of 13 March 2007. ECLI:EU:C:2007:161.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Alessandro Accorinti and Others v European Central Bank (T-79/13 DEP). Judgment of 19 June 2018. ECLI:EU:T:2015:756.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Carol Marilyn Robins and Others v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (C-278/05). Judgment of 25 January 2007. ECLI:EU:C:2007:56.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Safa Nicu Sepahan Co. v Council of the European Union (C-45/15 P). Judgment of 30 May 2017. ECLI:EU:C:2017:402, at [31]–[32] and [40].
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Eugen Schmidberger, Internationale Transporte und Planzüge v Republik Österreich (C-112/00). Judgment of 12 June 2003. ECLI:EU:C:2003:333.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Milena Tomášová v Slovenská republika – Ministerstvo spravodlivosti SR and Pohotovosť s.r.o. (C-168/15). Judgment of 28 July 2016. ECLI:EU:C:2016:602.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Günter Fuß v Stadt Halle (C-429/09). Judgment of 25 November 2010. ECLI:EU:C:2010:717.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Export Development Bank of Iran v Council of the European Union (T-553/15). Judgment of 8 May 2019. EU:T:2019:308 (unpublished).
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Roberto Aquino and Others v European Parliament (T-402/18). Judgment of 29 January 2020. EU:T:2020:13.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Alain Schoonjans v European Commission (T-79/17). Judgment of 12 September 2018. EU:T:2018:531.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. L v European Parliament (T-59/17). Judgment of 7 March 2019. EU:T:2019:140.
GENERAL COURT OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. PB v European Commission (T-609/16). Judgment of 14 December 2017. EU:T:2017:910.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Annibale Culin v Commission of the European Communities (C-343/87). Judgment of 7 February 1990. ECLI:EU:C:1990:49.
Tato práce je licencována pod Mezinárodní licencí Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 .
Copyright © 2026 Jitka Matějková, Ondřej Pavelek, Hana Kelblová