Lecture on the Cooperation between National Courts and the CJEU ****************************************************************************************** * Lecture on the Cooperation between National Courts and the CJEU ****************************************************************************************** On an uncharacteristically snowy April 14th, Sacha Prechal, a judge of the Court of Justic came to the Faculty of Law [ URL "http://www.prf.cuni.cz/en/"] to lecture on the cooperati national courts and the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU). Prechal, who assumed her role a CJEU in 2010, immediately began discussing the core topics that emerge when considering th between the courts of member states and their EU counterpart. She primarily focused on the courts, and pointed out an introductory principle that would shape the remainder of the le judges are also EU judges, as they have a responsibility for the application and enforceme judicial protection. Judge Prechal continued by explaining that this results in much respo rested on the national courts, and mentioned that when she talked to judges within the mem discussed how dealing with EU law poses some difficulty regarding comprehending and dealin see as “foreign.” Judge Prechal proceeded in concentrating on EU law by defining the main role of the Luxemb CJEU which is to ensure the uniform interpretation of EU law by member states, as well as disputes between EU states and EU institutions. The type of case most relevant to the them was a preliminary ruling procedure, which occurs when the national courts engage in formal with the CJEU in an effort to seek guidance in regards to interpreting a point of EU law. give a reference on this preliminary ruling if there’s a problem with the interpretation o validity of a law is rarely questioned. In some instances, cases where a lower court disag higher court are presented before the Court of Justice, for example the Landtová case, and prevalent in Germany, such as the age discrimination Petersen case. Also worth mentioning Italian Simmenthal case, which many law students will be familiar with, and concerned a re made following the quarrel a small local judge had with the case law of the Constitutional additional reason why a reference might be made is that national courts need backing from Justice when they want to make a piece of national legislation invalid. Judge Prechal gave as an example, stating that Ebert himself was driven from “pillar to post” as no one in hi wanted to make a decision regarding his wish to become a Hungarian advocate so he convince judges to make a reference to the CJEU about who was responsible. Judge Prechal also outlined what happens when a preliminary ruling question arrives at the types of cases, which consist of 60% of the work undertaken by the Court of Justice, must concisely translated into the 23 official languages of the EU, then sent to the capitals o states, the parties of the case and EU institutions within 20 days. The Court of Justice o but the language of procedure is that from where the procedure is coming from, i.e. if a c from the Czech Republic then the language used will be Czech. Once the procedure is comple and opinion of the judge must be translated into the official 23 languages again, and it i that over 1000 people work in translation services in order to cater to these requirements Prechal continued her intriguing lecture, keeping everyone absorbed with her humorous obse anecdotes, by informing us of some general extra information regarding the workings of the its interaction with national courts. She explained to the attendees the importance of res documentation in preliminary ruling proceedings. The reference must be checked to ascertai questions before the court are admissible and whether jurisdiction is held, as well as inv whether there are similar issue cases pending before the court as this is vital for cohere “Temporary specialisation” plays a key role here, as if one judge receives a case in a spe if a similar case arrives, that judge is allotted it. Prechal proceeded in her discussion highlighting that there is no guarantee that a Dutch judge, such as herself, would be assi case in the CJEU, and stressed that national judges have an obligation to provide a transp description of the national law as the reference will be handled by people who are not fam intricacies of each member state’s law. She mentioned that the European Union website is a resource, especially for national judges. Judge Prechal concluded her lecture by accentuating the interaction between the national c Court of Justice. The CJEU is attempting to make the national courts further responsible a more clear and comprehensible due to the issue that not every decision is translated into so how can the Court of Justice communicate the case law to the member states? Other mecha proved successful, such as official visits by Presidents of Supreme Courts to the CJEU, as visits from individual courts such as the Polish Constitutional Court. Participation by ju sessions within their own countries are included in these efforts, but Judge Prechal made evident that restructuring of the EU courts would be necessary. Following the opportunity the lecture finished with a positive piece of encouragement from the impressive judge who knowledge of EU law starts answered: “It begins with you, students, good luck!” Marita Moloney is a third year Law International student at University College Cork, and i to current affairs and literature. She decided to write for iForum as she believed it woul with the same interests