About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

2018-12 Reports of Cases before the Court of Justice and the Court of First Instance 1 (2018)

handle is hein.intyb/rcbjcofi0410 and id is 1 raw text is: VRw Reports of Cases OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL WAHL delivered on 11 September 2018' Case C-378/17 The Minister for Justice and Equality, The Commissioner of An Garda Siochina V The Workplace Relations Commission; notice parties: Ronald Boyle, Brian Fitzpatrick, Gerard Cotter (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court (Ireland)) (Request for a preliminary ruling - A rule dividing jurisdiction between two bodies in specific cases on the basis of the nature of the complaint made - Complaints of discrimination in the context of employment - Limited jurisdiction of a statutory body - No jurisdiction to hear cases requiring the disapplication of national legislation in conflict with EU law - Primacy of EU law - Full effectiveness - Procedural autonomy of Member States - Equivalence and effectiveness) 1. Where do the limits of the procedural autonomy of Member States lie? Or more specifically: to what extent does the principle of the primacy of EU law circumscribe the possibility for Member States to apply (constitutional) rules concerning the attribution of jurisdiction in a particular field of law? That is, in essence, the question put to the Court by the Supreme Court of Ireland in this case. 2. More concretely at issue is the compatibility with the principle of the primacy of EU law of a rule dividing jurisdiction in specific cases between the High Court and a statutory body, the Workplace Relations Commission ('the WRC'). 3. The competent body to hear a case depends on the nature of the complaint put forward. While the WRC generally enjoys jurisdiction to hear complaints in employment equality matters based on Directive 2000/78/EC2 and the national legislation transposing that directive, that body has no jurisdiction to hear cases where a successful outcome of the complaint would require disapplication of a provision of national (primary or secondary) legislation. Because of that rule, the WRC has no jurisdiction to consider whether a provision of national law is in breach of EU employment equality legislation. Instead, the competent body for seeking redress for discrimination in cases requiring the disapplication of national law is the High Court. 1 Original language: English. 2 Council Directive of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation (OJ 2000 L 303, p. 16). ECLJ:EU:C:2018:6981 1

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most