diplomsko delo
Povzetek
Temeljni mehanizem za zagotavljanje ucinkovite in enotne uporabe ter razlage
zakonodaje Unije predstavlja sodelovanje, ki se med nacionalnimi sodišci držav
clanic in Sodišcem Evropske unije vzpostavi v okviru postopka predhodnega
odlocanja. Casovno obdobje, ki ga Sodišce v tem postopku potrebuje za izdajo
predhodne odlocbe, je zlasti zaradi velikega števila udeležencev, ki lahko v
postopku sodelujejo, in obveznosti povezanih s prevajanjem stališc, ki jih imajo
možnost predložiti vse države clanice, relativno dolgo in zato velikokrat
problematicno z vidika zagotavljanja ucinkovitega sodnega varstva. Poleg tega
je bilo na podrocjih obmocja svobode, varnosti in pravice sodno varstvo po prej
veljavni Pogodbi o Evropski uniji in Pogodbi o ustanovitvi Evropske skupnosti še
dodatno oslabljeno zaradi omejenih pristojnosti, ki so bile za Sodišce dolocene
v zvezi s predhodnim odlocanjem o pravnih aktih institucij Unije, sprejetih na teh
podrocjih. Tako so bili posamezniki ravno na teh podrocjih, ki so del obmocja
svobode, varnosti in pravice, kjer so njihove pravice še posebej obcutljive,
prikrajšani za bolj ucinkovito sodno varstvo. Slednje se je nekoliko izboljšalo z
uvedbo hitrega postopka leta 2001. Z njegovo uporabo ima namrec Sodišce
možnost, da v izjemno nujnih primerih predhodno odlocbo sprejme v krajšem
roku kot tistem, ki ga potrebuje pri uporabi rednega postopka predhodnega
odlocanja. Pospešitev odlocanja z uporabo hitrega postopka pa je rezultat
absolutne prednosti, ki jo imajo vse stopnje predloga za sprejetje predhodne
odlocbe po hitrem postopku glede na vse ostale predložene zadeve. Glede na
to, da Sodišce z uporabo hitrega postopka zaradi njegove izjemne narave ni
moglo in ne more zagotavljati ucinkovitega sodnega varstva v vseh primerih, je
bil posebej za obmocje svobode, varnosti in pravice leta 2008 uveden še nujni
postopek predhodnega odlocanja. Z uveljavitvijo tega postopka je Sodišce
pridobilo možnost, da v bistveno skrajšanih rokih obravnava najobcutljivejša
vprašanja s podrocij tega obmocja. Bistvene znacilnosti, ki nujni postopek
odražajo in se od rednega postopka predhodnega odlocanja razlikujejo ter s
tem zagotavljajo hitrejše odlocanje Sodišca, opredeljujejo zlasti obravnava
predloga za sprejetje predhodne odlocbe v okviru senata petih sodnikov,
vi
posebej dolocenem za to, odvijanje pisnega dela postopka predvsem po
elektronski poti, izjemno skrajšanje rokov ter omejeno število udeležencev, ki
lahko sodelujejo v pisnem delu postopka. V praksi je okrepljeno sodno varstvo,
ki je posledica uvedbe nujnega postopka predhodnega dolocanja, mogoce
razbrati iz sodne prakse Sodišca, ki je bila izid uporabe tega postopka.
Nenazadnje je bil v luci krepitve sodnega varstva tudi sprejem in uveljavitev
Lizbonske pogodbe, s katero so bile odpravljene omejitve pristojnosti Sodišca
za predhodno odlocanje o zadevah, ki se nanašajo na obmocje svobode,
varnosti in pravice.
Ključne besede
Lizbonska pogodba;sodno varstvo;diplomska dela;
Podatki
Jezik: |
Slovenski jezik |
Leto izida: |
2010 |
Izvor: |
Maribor |
Tipologija: |
2.11 - Diplomsko delo |
Organizacija: |
UM PF - Pravna fakulteta |
Založnik: |
[B. Markežič] |
UDK: |
34(043.2) |
COBISS: |
4075819
|
Št. ogledov: |
2598 |
Št. prenosov: |
181 |
Ocena: |
0 (0 glasov) |
Metapodatki: |
|
Ostali podatki
Sekundarni jezik: |
Angleški jezik |
Sekundarni naslov: |
URGENT PRELIMINARY RULING PROCEDURE, A TOOL FOR INCREASED JUDICIAL PROTECTION IN THE AREA OF FREEDOM, SECURITY AND JUSTICE |
Sekundarni povzetek: |
The cooperation that is under the preliminary ruling procedure established
between the courts and tribunals of the Member States and the Court of Justice
of the European Union represents the key tool to ensure effective and uniform
application and interpretation of the Union legal order. In this case, the time
taken upon Court of Justice to answer to the questions posed in the preliminary
ruling procedure, is often unreasonable, particulary on account of the number of
players involved and the inherent constraints of translating the observations
which every Member State is afforded to make, and thus often questionable in
terms of ensuring an effective judicial protection. Moreover, the judicial
protection in the areas covered by area of freedom, security and justice under
the previously existing Treaty on European Union and Treaty establishing the
European Community was further weakened, because of the limited jurisdiction
imposed upon Court of Justice to issue a preliminary ruling on legal acts which
had been adopted by the institutions of the Union in those areas. This inflicted
out that individuals in the area of freedom, security and justice, where their
vii
rights are particulary vulnerable, were deprived of an effective judicial
protection. With the introduction of an accelerated procedure in 2001, that
enables the Court of Justice to deal with references for a preliminary ruling in
certain exceptional cases more quickly than what normally applies under the
use of ordinary preliminary ruling procedure, the situation has improved. The
acceleration is achieved by giving absolute priority to the reference for a
preliminary ruling in question over all other pending cases at all stages of the
proceedings. Because of its exceptional nature the accelerated procedure
turned out to be inadequate for greater use and thus insufficient to provide
effective legal protection in all cases. That caused the establishment of an
urgent preliminary ruling procedure in 2008 for matters relating to the area of
freedom, security and justice. As regards the implementation of this procedure,
the Court of Justice has been given the possibility to deal far more quickly with
the most sensitive issues relating to the area of freedom, security and justice.
The important features, which distinguish the new procedure from the ordinary
preliminary ruling procedure and thus ensure the desired expeditiousness of the
procedure, represent in particular more frequent use of the electronic means in
the written stage of the procedure, consideration of the proposal for a
preliminary ruling by the Chamber of five judges, specifically designated for this
purpose, shorter time-limits and the limited number of persons, who are entitled
to participate in the written stage. Enhanced judicial protection emerges in
practice from the case law of the Court of Justice, in which the Court applied
urgent preliminary procedure. The judicial protection has been further
strengthened by the adoption and entrance into force of the Treaty of Lisbon,
that removed restrictions imposed upon the Court of Justice to give preliminary
rulings on issues that arise from the area of freedom security and justice. |
Sekundarne ključne besede: |
Accelerated preliminary ruling procedure;area of freedom;security and justice;effective judicial protection;jurisdiction of the Court of Justice to give preliminary
rulings;Treaty of Lisbon;urgent preliminary ruling procedure.; |
URN: |
URN:SI:UM: |
Vrsta dela (COBISS): |
Diplomsko delo |
Komentar na gradivo: |
Univ. v Mariboru, Pravna fakulteta |
Strani: |
Vii, 95 f. |
Ključne besede (UDK): |
social sciences;družbene vede;law;jurisprudence;pravo;pravoznanstvo; |
ID: |
1011241 |