The principle of effective judicial protection and the issue of locus standi of individuals in a direct action for annulment of community acts before the European Courts

Abstract

In the first chapter I will deal very briefly with the locus standi of priviliged applicants. Then, the locus standi of non-priviliged applications in a direct action for annulment will ensue. Likewise, I will refer to the special cases namely competition, anti-dumping and state aid proceedings in order to bring out the difference in treatment vis-a-vis individuals. The second chapter will deal with the Codorniu case and an overview of the ensuing case law up to the recent decisions given in Jego-Quere and UPA. These latter decisions have attracted various criticisms which I will be referring to. The next chapter will be dedicated to the alternative ways of redress for individuals particularly preliminary reference procedure; action for damages; indirect challenge and action for declaration. I will be asking the question whether these alternative remedies fill in the judicial gap if such a gap exists in the first place. Is the principle of effective judicial protection ensured? In the last chapter, I will be referring to the amendments included in the Constitution relevant to the subject in issue. Will there be a better judicial protection especially with regards to access to the European Courts, when and if the Constitution comes into force? Besides, if the Constitution comes into force and, hence, the European Union acquires a legal personality, what will be the position vis-a-vis the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms? On the other hand, if the Constitution is not ratified what should be done in this area to achieve effective judicial protection? Some concluding remarks will then follow.