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

个人权利的民事诉讼保护在很大程度上没有在整个欧盟协调一致，因此即使在执行欧盟法律时，也遵循各自成员国的程序法规则。这导致了欧盟法律的相关法律立场（特别是但不仅是在消费者保护领域）与成员国的程序规则之间的冲突。欧洲法院通过参照两项原则来解决此类冲突：成员国限制欧盟法律执行的程序规则不得低于管辖类似国内行动的程序规则（等效原则），并且不得以这样一种方式制定，即在实践中不可能或过于困难地行使欧盟法律赋予的权利（有效性原则）。然而，由于这些原则是在其他情况下制定的，因此缺乏明确的标准来确定成员国的程序自治在哪里结束，以及欧盟法律在这一点之外究竟如何影响程序法。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补救的影响。这项研究的出发点是一个假设，即个别司法补救的职能与会员国的程序自主之间存在着相互关系。因此，欧盟法与国家民事诉讼法之间的冲突与赋予个人司法救济的不同功能有关：从国家法的角度来看，执法和解决冲突是个人司法救济的主要功能，而从欧盟法的角度来看，个人司法救济也是一种追求公共利益政策目标的机制。该项目的第一个子目标是验证或否定这个假设。是否存在这种相关性甚至因果关系，需要通过分析国家法律（德国法律和其他欧盟成员国选定的法律体系）和欧盟法律在四个程序问题上的程序规则来揭示。为此，将应用专门为该项目开发的分析模型。应根据所取得的结果，起草一项关于民事诉讼职能的欧洲模式，其中特别要平衡解决冲突职能和指导职能。在此基础上，应当对民事诉讼的效力原则和等效原则进行适当的细化。

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.