Prejudicinio sprendimo procedūros kaip alternatyvos privačių subjektų teikiamiems ieškiniams dėl ES teisės akto panaikinimo trūkumai

LTAtmesdamas privačių subjektų teikiamus tiesioginius ieškinius dėl ES teisės aktų panaikinimo (SESV 263 straipsnis), Europos Sąjungos Teisingumo Teismas dažnai atkreipia dėmesį į prejudicinio sprendimo procedūros (SESV 267 straipsnis) teikiamas galimybes. Straipsnyje vertinama prejudicinio sprendimo procedūra Europos Sąjungos Teisingumo Teisme kaip alternatyva tiesioginiams ieškiniams dėl ES teisės akto panaikinimo, daugiausia dėmesio skiriant prejudicinių sprendimų trūkumams, dėl kurių šis alternatyvus ES teisės aktų teisėtumo kontrolės instrumentas ne visada garantuoja teisę į teisminę gynybą arba kelia gynybos veiksmingumo klausimų. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Europos Sąjungos Teisingumo Teismas (Court of Justice of the European Union); Prejudicinis sprendimas; Europos Sąjungos teisė; European Court of Justice; Preliminary ruling procedure; Annulment of European Union legal acts.

ENWhen dismissing direct actions for annulment (Article 267 TFEU) European Court of Justice often refers to preliminary ruling procedure (Article 267 TFEU) as an alternative way to seek judicial review of EU legal act. Taking this into account, the present article examines preliminary ruling procedure in the European Court of Justice as an alternative to direct actions for annulment, the main attention paying to the shortcomings which result in failure in some cases to provide judicial protection or to ensure effective judicial protection. The article reveals that a private applicant has no guarantee that a national court will find it necessary to refer the question to the European Court of Justice, or that the question submitted by the national court will reflect all the arguments that private applicant finds important. Moreover, it is noted that proceedings before the national court always necessitate national measures implementing an EU legal act. Directly applicable EU measures thus rule out the possibility to reach the European Court of Justice through the preliminary ruling procedure. This article also addresses such shortcomings as the problematic application of interim measures, high legal costs and limited liability of Member State. Special attention is paid to the difference of locus standi in national law, different legal traditions and activeness of national courts in submitting questions for preliminary rulings, as well as varying experience and training of judges in the Member States. [From the publication]