A more recent version of these Annulment Action notes – written by Cambridge/Bpp/College Of Law students – is available here.
The following is a more accessble plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our GDL EU Law Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:
Annulment Action _______________________________________________________
Treaty Basis Art 265 TFEU = the MS may bring an action where institutions of the EU fail to act Art 263 TFEU = CoJ has jurisdiction to review the legality of EU acts:
? Lack of competence
? Infringement of an essential procedural requirement; infringe of the treaties; infringement of any rule of law; misuse of powers The EC Treaty provided annulment action against a 'decision' whereas Lisbon provided against an 'act'. However in reality this change just reflects case-law - in the Codorniu case regulations were reviewed. Yet recognition in the treaties reflects the move towards greater accountability & transparency in the reforms.
? A Arnull: annulment action as filling in gaps in the EU's judicial review systems
What is an act?Commission v Council (re: European Road Transport Agreement): any act intended to have legal effects Corporation v Commission: look to the "substance" of an act - any act capable of changing the legal interests of an applicant Reynolds Tobacco: the decision to bring legal action does not of itself count as an act
Who can bring an action?
1. Privileged Applicants: a. Unlimited rights to apply b. No procedural requirements c. Commission; EP; MS i. Dynamic development of EP's status: originally no mention of its status in treaty of Rome as its decision-making powers were very limited & it wasn't directly elected ii. E P v Council (Comitology) application by EP where not found to be an applicant
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our GDL EU Law Notes.