The civil procedural enforcement of EU law - procedural - autonomy of the member states?

欧盟法律的民事程序执行——程序——成员国的自治？

• 批准号: 410110353
• 负责人: Professor Dr. Malte Kramme
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: Lehrstuhl für Bürgerliches Recht und IT-Recht
• 依托单位国家: 德国
• 项目类别: Research Grants
• 财政年份: 2018
• 资助国家: 德国
• 起止时间: 2017-12-31 至 2022-12-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gepris.dfg.de/gepris/projekt/410110353?language=en
• 关键词: civil; procedural; enforcement; EU; law

The civil procedural protection of individual rights is largely not harmonized throughout the European Union, and thus follows the rules of the respective Member States' procedural laws, even when EU law is enforced. This leads to conflicts between the relevant legal positions of EU law (in particular but not only in the area of consumer protection) and the procedural rules of the Member States. The European Court of Justice solves such conflicts by reference to two principles: Procedural rules of a Member State restricting the enforcement of EU law must not be less favourable than those governing similar domestic actions (principle of equivalence), and may not be framed in such a way as to make it in practice impossible or excessively difficult to exercise the rights conferred by EU law (principle of effectiveness). However, since these principles have been developed in other contexts, there is a lack of clear criteria for determining where the procedural autonomy of the Member States ends and how exactly the EU law influences the procedural law beyond this point.The aim of the proposed project is therefore to outline the effects of EU law on individual judicial redress in a more precise manner.The starting point of the study is the hypothesis that there is a correlation of the functions of individual judicial redress and procedural autonomy of the Member States. Thus, conflicts between EU law and national civil procedural law are related to different functions assigned to individual judicial redress: while from the perspective of national law, law enforcement and conflict resolution are regarded as primary functions of individual judicial redress , from the point of view of EU law, individual judicial redress serves also as a mechanism to pursue policy goals of public interest.The first sub-goal of the project is to verify or to invalidate this hypothesis. Whether such a correlation or even a causal relationship exists, shall be disclosed by an analysis of procedural rules of national law (German law and selected legal systems of other EU Member States) and of EU law on four procedural issues. For this purpose, an analysis model specially developed for the project will be applied.On the basis of the results obtained, a European model on functions of civil proceedings shall be drafted which, in particular, balances the conflict-resolution function with the steering function. On this basis, the principle of effectiveness and equivalence should be refined in a suitable manner for civil proceedings.

在整个欧洲联盟，对个人权利的民事诉讼保护基本上不统一，因此，即使在执行欧盟法律的情况下，也遵循各自成员国的诉讼法规则。这导致了欧盟法律的相关法律的立场（特别是但不仅仅是在消费者保护领域）与成员国的程序规则之间的冲突。欧洲法院参照两项原则解决此类冲突：成员国限制执行欧盟法律的程序规则不得低于管辖类似国内行动的程序规则（等同原则），并且不得以使欧盟法律赋予的权利在实践中无法或过于难以行使的方式制定（有效性原则）。然而，由于这些原则是在其他情况下制定的，由于缺乏明确的标准来确定欧盟成员国的程序自主权在何处终止，以及欧盟法律如何影响程序法超出这一点。因此，拟议项目的目的是以更精确的方式概述欧盟法律对个人司法救济的影响。研究的出发点是假设，个别司法救济的功能与成员国的程序自主权之间存在着关联。 因此，欧盟法律与国家民事诉讼法之间的冲突与赋予个人司法补救的不同职能有关：而从国内法的角度来看，执法和冲突解决被视为个人司法救济的主要职能，从欧盟法律的角度来看，个人司法补救也是追求公共利益的政策目标的一种机制，该项目的第一个分目标是验证或推翻这一假设。这种相关性或因果关系是否存在，应通过分析国家法律（德国法律和欧盟其他成员国的某些法律的制度）和欧盟法律关于四个程序问题的程序规则来揭示。为此，将采用专门为该项目开发的分析模型，并在所获结果的基础上，起草一份关于民事诉讼职能的欧洲模型，该模型将特别平衡解决冲突职能与指导职能。在此基础上，应当以适合民事诉讼的方式完善效力和等同原则。