Sekundarni povzetek: |
In this thesis I focused on the reform of the General Court, where most of the backlogs accrued and where the court had the biggest difficulties with the duration of procedures and workload. Due to the increase of cases brought to the General Court, resulting from EU enlargements and enlargement of responsibilities that were brought about by the new EU treaty, a violation of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU increasingly threatened. The first proposal on the reform of the General Court, the President of the Court of Justice, Skouris and his colleagues, has already been made in 2011, in which they wanted to increase the number of judges of the General Court for twelve and where also other proposals for reorganization were made. However, since the Council could not agree on the appointment system and rotations of additional judges, President Skouris made an amended proposal in 2013, where instead of twelve judges, nine additional judges would be appointed, regardless of this proposal no agreement had been reached. It is therefore that in 2014 the EU Court submitted the new proposal, in which an increase of judges was included, so that each Member State has two judges, all in all, almost 56. The reform comprises of three stages that will end by 01.09.2019. In the first stage, the number of judges will increase up to twelve, in the second stage, the Civil Service Tribunal will be abolished and seven judges will be transferred to the General Court and in the third stage, additional nine judges will be added. The adopted reform has been, already at the time of the proposal, faced with criticism, nevertheless, the legislative institutions have accepted it. In my thesis I present a general overview of the EU Court from an institutional and a competency point of view, I focus on the proposed reform, its criticism, and the final passed reform, that is in the stage of implementation. The fact is that the reform is the result of concession to political pressure from the Member States, since there is no real need for such an enormous increase of number of judges, in particular, there is a lack of number of support staff for such a solution, because they will not be able to meet the needs, of an army of judges, in time. Only time will show us, if the solution is good or not. |