Evropská zletilost českých (nejvyšších) soudů aneb prvních 18 let předběžných otázek z Brna

Natálie Dřínovská; Zuzana Vikarská

doi:10.5817/CPVP2023-1-1

Coming of Age of the Czech (Supreme) Courts, or the First 18 Years of Preliminary References from Brno

Vol.31,No.1(2023)

Natálie Dřínovská Zuzana Vikarská

https://doi.org/10.5817/CPVP2023-1-1

PDF (Czech)

Abstract

This article offers an analysis of all preliminary references that have originated from the two Czech Supreme Courts since the Czech Republic’s accession to the EU. In the presented text, we first briefly introduce the preliminary reference mechanism and the existing academic texts that deal with the role of national courts in it (Part I). We then offer some overview data on preliminary references in a European comparison, which allows the reader to consider the activity of Czech courts in a broader context (Part II). The centerpiece of the article focuses on an analysis of the decision-making activity of the two Czech Supreme Courts, which draws primarily on a study of the text of the court decisions themselves (Part III). This central third part is divided into three subchapters according to the individual stages of the proceedings. The analysis of the referral orders of the national courts (phase A) is the most comprehensive, showing, for example, different levels of involvement and different levels of assertiveness of individual judges, as well as different motivations for submitting preliminary references. The ‘European’ phase of the proceedings (Phase B) is the most briefly explored, focusing on how the Court of Justice itself assesses the relevance of the questions referred to it. We look again in somewhat more detail at the follow-up proceedings in the national courts (Phase C), to see whether the Czech Supreme Courts follow the ECJ’s legal opinions loyally. We conclude with some observations on the trends that can be observed from the Czech Supreme Courts’ decision-making.

Keywords:
preliminary references; Court of Justice of the EU; national courts; judicial dialogue

Pages:
9–45

Author biography

Natálie Dřínovská

Department of Constitutional Law and Political Science, Faculty of Law, Masaryk University, Brno

Ph.D. student; at the time of submission of the article Law Clerk, Supreme Administrative Court of the Czech Republic, Brno

References

BARATTA, R. National Courts as Guardians and Ordinary Courts of EU Law: Opinion 1/09 of the ECJ. Legal Issues of Economic Integration. 2011, roč. 38, č. 4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54648/LEIE2011020

BARENTS, R. Remedies and Procedures Before the EU Courts. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International B.V., 2020.

BOBEK, M. Learning to Talk: Preliminary Rulings, the Courts of the New Member States and the Court of Justice. Common Market Law Review. 2008, roč. 45, č. 6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54648/COLA2008115

BOBEK, M. Of Feasibility and Silent Elephants: The Legitimacy of the Court of Justice through the Eyes of National Courts. In: ADAMS, M. et al. (eds.). Judging Europe’s Judges: The Legitimacy of the Case Law of the European Court of Justice [Bloomsbury Collections]. London: Hart Publishing, 2013.

BOBEK, M. Landtová, Holubec, and the Problem of an Uncooperative Court: Implications for the Preliminary Rulings Procedure. European Constitutional Law Review. 2014, roč. 10, č. 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019614001047

BOBEK, M. Talking Now?: Preliminary Rulings in and from the New Member States. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law. SAGE Publications Ltd, 2014, roč. 21, č. 4.

BOBEK, M. The Court of Justice, the National Courts, and the Spirit of Cooperation: between Dichtung and Wahrheit. In: LAZOWSKI, A., BLOCKMANS, S. Research Handbook on EU Institutional Law. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2016.

BOBEK, M. a kol. Předběžná otázka v komunitárním právu. Praha: Linde, 2005.

BOBEK, M., BŘÍZA, P., HUBKOVÁ, P. Vnitrostátní aplikace práva Evropské unie. Praha: C. H. Beck, 2022.

BOGOJEVIĆ, S. Judicial Dialogue Unpacked: Twenty Years of Preliminary References on Environmental Matters Initiated by the Swedish Judiciary. Journal of Environmental Law. 2017, roč. 29, č. 2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jel/eqx009

BREKKE, S. A., NAURIN, D., ŠADL, U., LÓPEZ-ZURITA, L. That’s an Order! How the Quest for Efficiency Is Transforming Judicial Cooperation in Europe. Journal of Common Market Studies. 2023, roč. 61, č. 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.13346

BROBERG, M., FENGER, N. Preliminary References to the European Court of Justice. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 2021, s. 29 a násl. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198843580.003.0002

CAMRDA, J. Čl. 43 [Právo na azyl]. In: HUSSEINI, F., BARTOŇ, M., KOKEŠ, M., KOPA, M. a kol. Listina základních práv a svobod. 1. vyd. Praha: C. H. Beck, 2021.

CAMRDA, J. Podceňované právo azylu. Jiné právo [online]. [cit. 28. 12. 2022]. Dostupné z: https://jinepravo.blogspot.com/2011/02/podcenovane-pravo-azylu.html

DŘÍNOVSKÁ, N. Referenční rámec ústavnosti a právo Evropské unie. Diplomová práce. Brno: Masarykova univerzita, Právnická fakulta, 2021.

DYEVRE, A., LAMPACH, N., GLAVINA, M. Chilling or Learning? The Effect of Negative Feedback on Interjudicial Cooperation in Nonhierarchcal Referral Regimes. Journal of Law and Courts. 2022. roč. 10, č. 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/714704

GESTEL, R. van, POORTER, J. de. Dialogue as a Concept. In: In the Court We Trust: Cooperation, Coordination and Collaboration between the ECJ and Supreme Administrative Courts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Studies in European Law and Policy, 2019.

IGLESIAS SANCHÉZ, S. Preliminary Rulings before the General Court: Crossing the Last Frontier of the Reform of the EU Judicial System? EU Law Live. 2022, č. 125.

Jak pomoci přetíženému Nejvyššímu správnímu soudu? To bylo hlavní téma setkání soudců se členy Ústavně-právního výboru Senátu ČR. In: Nejvyšší správní soud [online]. 20. 4. 2022 [cit. 28. 12. 2022]. Dostupné z: https://www.nssoud.cz/aktualne/tiskove-zpravy/detail/jak-pomoci-pretizenemu-nejvyssimu-spravnimu-soudu-to-bylo-hlavni-tema-setkani-soudcu-nss-se-cleny-ustavne-pravniho-vyboru-senatu-cr

JAREMBA, U., MAYORAL, J. A. The Europeanization of National Judiciaries: Definitions, Indicators and Mechanisms. Journal of European Public Policy. Routledge, 2019, roč. 26, č. 3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2018.1433708

KORTE, J. et al. Primus Inter Pares: The European Court and National Courts. The Follow-up by National Courts of Preliminary Rulings ex Art. 177 of the Treaty of Rome: A Report on the Situation in the Netherlands. EUI [online]. 1990 [cit. 18. 4. 2021]. Dostupné z: https://cadmus.eui.eu//handle/1814/69

KROMMENDIJK, J. The Highest Dutch Courts and the Preliminary Ruling Procedure: Critically Obedient Interlocutors of the Court of Justice. European Law Journal. 2019, roč. 25, č. 4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/eulj.12322

KROMMENDIJK, J. National Courts and Preliminary References to the Court of Justice. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781800374171

KÜHN, Z. Ještě jednou k ústavnímu základu působení komunitárního práva v českém právním řádu. Právní rozhledy. 2004, č. 10.

KÜHN, Z. Ultra Vires Review and the Demise of Constitutional Pluralism: the Czecho-Slovak Pension Saga, and the Dangers of State Courts’ Defiance of EU Law. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law. 2016. roč. 23, č. 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X1602300111

KÜHN, Z. The Czech Republic: From a Euro-Friendly Approach of the Constitutional Court to Proclaiming a Court of Justice Judgment Ultra Vires. In: ALBI, A., BARDUTZKY, S. (eds.). National Constitutions in European and Global Governance: Democracy, Rights, the Rule of Law. The Hague: T.M.C. Asser Press, 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-273-6_17

KÜHN, Z., KYSELA, J. Na základě čeho bude působit komunitární právo v českém právním řádu? Právní rozhledy. 2004, č. 1.

LEIJON, K., GLAVINA, M. Why Passive? Exploring National Judges’ Motives for Not Re-questing Preliminary Rulings. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law. 2022, roč. 29, č. 2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X221091768

LENAERTS, K. Upholding the Rule of Law through Judicial Dialogue. Yearbook of European Law. 2019, roč. 38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/yel/yez002

LENAERTS, K. et al. EU Procedural Law. Oxford University Press, 2014.

MIKEŠ, P. Pronikání mezinárodního práva do rozhodovací činnosti vnitrostátních orgánů. Disertační práce. Praha: Univerzita Karlova, Právnická fakulta, 2011.

Nejvyšší správní soud je podle předsedy Šimky přetížený. In: ČTK – České noviny [online]. 11. 2. 2022 [cit. 28. 12. 2022]. Dostupné z: https://www.ceskenoviny.cz/zpravy/nejvyssi-spravni-soud-je-podle-predsedy-simky-pretizeny/2159410

NYIKOS, S. A. The European Court of Justice and National Courts: Strategic Interaction within the EU Judicial Process. CiteSeer^x [online]. San Francisco, 2001 [cit. 18. 1. 2023]. Dostupné z: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/pdf/9ec3ef2672a5dd57e89c98a66db74105765af1a5

NYIKOS, S. A. The Preliminary Reference Process: National Court Implementation, Changing Opportunity Structures and Litigant Desistment. European Union Politics. SAGE Publications, 2003, roč. 4, č. 4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/146511650344002

NYIKOS, S. A. Strategic Interaction among Courts within the Preliminary Reference Process – Stage 1: National Court Preemptive Opinions. European Journal of Political Research. 2006, roč. 45 , č. 4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2006.00627.x

NYIKOS, S. A. Courts. In: GRAZIANO, P., VINK, M. P. (eds.). Europeanization: New Research Agendas. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2008.

OVÁDEK, M., WIJTVLIET, W., GLAVINA, M. Which Courts Matter Most? Measuring Importance in the EU Preliminary Reference System. EJLS Online First. 2020, roč. 12.

PAVONE, T. The Ghostwriters: Lawyers and the Politics behind the Judicial Construction of Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009076326

PAVONE, T., KELEMEN, R. D. The Evolving Judicial Politics of European Integration: The European Court of Justice and National Courts Revisited. European Law Journal. 2019, roč. 25, č. 4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/eulj.12321

PIVODA, M. Constitutional Courts and Preliminary References to the CJEU. Diplomová práce. Brno: Masarykova univerzita, Právnická fakulta, 2019.

POKORNÝ, M. Jsme zahlcení, řešte to, stěžuje si šéf Nejvyššího správního soudu sněmovně. Jeden případ trvá průměrně 195 dní. In: Hospodářské noviny (HN.cz) [online]. 14. 1. 2020 [cit. 28. 12. 2022]. Dostupné z: https://archiv.hn.cz/c1-66705560-jsme-zahlceni-reste-to-stezuje-si-sef-nejvyssiho-spravniho-soudu-snemovne-jeden-pripad-trva-prumerne-195-dni

PROCHÁZKOVÁ, A. Zahlcený NSS může nakonec soudit mrtvé právo. In: Týdeník Respekt [online]. 1. 4. 2022 [cit. 28. 12. 2022]. Dostupné z: https://www.respekt.cz/agenda/zahlceny-nejvyssi-spravni-soud-muze-ohrozit-vymahatelnost-spravedlnosti

SCHWARZE, J. Die Befolgung von Vorabentscheidungen des Europäischen Gerichtshofs durch deutsche Gerichte. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 1988.

SQUINTANI, L., ANNINK, D. Judicial Cooperation in Environmental Matters: Mapping National Courts’ Behaviour in Follow-up Cases. Journal for European Environmental & Planning Law. 2018, roč. 15, č. 2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/18760104-01502003

SQUINTANI, L., RAKIPI, J. Judicial Cooperation in Environmental Matters: Mapping National Courts Behaviour in Follow-up Cases. Environmental Law Review. SAGE Publications, 2018, roč. 20, č. 2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1461452918767791

SQUINTANI, L., KALISVAART, S. Environmental Democracy and Judicial Cooperation in Environmental Matters: Mapping National Courts’ Behaviour in Follow-up Cases. European Papers. 2020, roč. 5, č. 2.

STEHLÍK, V., SEHNÁLEK, D. The Use of the Preliminary Ruling Procedure by Czech Courts: Historical Retrospective and Beyond. TalTech Journal of European Studies. Sciendo, 2019, roč. 9, č. 4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2019-0041

STONE SWEET, A., BRUNELL, T. L. The European Court and the National Courts: a Statistical Analysis of Preliminary References, 1961–95. Journal of European Public Policy. Routledge, 1998, roč. 5, č. 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13501768880000041

TRIDIMAS, T. The ECJ and the National Courts: Dialogue, Cooperation, and Instability. In: CHALMERS, D., ARNULL, A. (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of European Union Law, Oxford Handbooks. Oxford Academic, 2015, s. 403–430.

VARJU, M., VÁRNAY, E. After the Judgment: The Implementation of Preliminary Rulings in the Hungarian Judicial System 2004–2019 and Beyond. Common Market Law Review. 2022, roč. 59, č. 6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54648/COLA2022117

WALLERMAN GHAVANINI, A. Mostly harmless: the referring court in the preliminary reference procedure. European Law Review. 2022, roč. 47, č. 3.

ŽONDRA, M. Reference to Preliminary Rulings Lodged by Czech Courts, 2004–2009. In: BĚLOHLÁVEK, A. J., ROZEHNALOVÁ, N. Czech Yearbook of International Law – Second Decade Ahead: Tracing the Global Crisis – 2010. Juris Publishing, Inc., 2010.

Metrics