• W ślad za wizytą studyjną sędziów Sądu Unii Europejskiej w Warszawie, zorganizowanej w czerwcu br. przez NRA w siedzibie Izby Adwokackiej w Warszawie, zapraszamy serdecznie do przeczytania wywiadu przeprowadzonego z Prezesem Sądu Unii Europejskiej Marc Van Der Woude.
• Wywiad przeprowadził mec. Wojciech Bagiński - Przewodniczącego Komisji Zagranicznej NRA.

Wojciech Bagiński (WB): Can you please provide some background for our readers and explain the jurisdiction of the Court? In what matters the Court adjudicates? Can a natural person or a company from Poland sue in your court?

Marc van der Woude (MW) : The judicial architecture of the European Union is not always easy to understand. When national administrations fail to apply EU rules correctly, citizens and companies can seek judicial protection before their national courts, which can request the Court of Justice to assist them in the interpretation of those rules by means of the preliminary reference procedure. By contrast, when the EU administration itself fails to apply these rules correctly, the General Court offers this protection. This means indeed that Polish citizens and companies can directly file applications before the General Court, subject to admissibility conditions. Moreover, if they consider that the General Court did not take the right decision, they can generally go on appeal before the Court of Justice. This appeal is limited to points of law only. The confusing element in this picture is that the General Court and the Court of Justice belong to the same institution, which bears the name Court of Justice of the EU.

The cases coming to the General Court mirror the activities of the EU. Since these activities are increasingly varied, we deal with a wide range of issues. In quantitative terms, trademark registration cases dealing with appeals against decisions of the EUIPO represent the largest group, followed by state aid matters, involving the European Commission, and appeals in financial matters against decisions taken by the European Central Bank. Then come appeals against restrictive measures adopted by the Council of Ministers to sanction persons and entities linked to oppressive or aggressive regimes, such as Russia. In qualitative terms, the large competition law cases, whether they are in the field of state aid, antitrust or merger control, are very often the most voluminous and time-consuming cases. Finally, during the last two years, several cases were filed against Commission decisions adopted under the Digital Services and Market Acts.

WB: Do you see a lot of claims from Poland? In what matters? If not, what do you think is the reason for this?

MW: As far as the General Court is concerned, I would like to mention that our statistics allow us to identify the language in which a case is brought, but not the country of origin of the applicant. It might well be that a Polish company brings a case in English by using a foreign, most often Brussels based, law firm. With this caveat in mind, I am a bit surprised by the relatively low number of cases originating from Poland, especially since Poland is one of the largest Member States. The cases filed in Polish that we see are relatively varied. They primarily deal with state aid and competition law issues. I do not have an explanation for this phenomenon, but I assume that Polish citizens and companies are not always aware of the possibility to contest EU acts and that, when they do challenge them, they tend to rely on foreign law firms.

WB: From what countries do you see most claims? Why do you think these countries are most active in filing claims?  

MW: Here again, I must underline that the nationality of the applicant does not necessarily match the language in which the case is brought. For 2024, as regards languages, English accounts for approximately 50% of the incoming cases, followed by French (17%) German (11%) and Spanish (6%). The massive use of English corresponds to the fact that it has become the lingua franca of the EU. This linguistic aspect set aside, there is a correlation between the origin of cases brought before the General Court and the relative weight of the country in economic terms. This center of gravity still lies in the old Member States of 1995, but has been extended to Poland and the Czech Republic. My impression is that Poland’s economic power is not reflected in terms of cases being filed before the General Court. I see, for instance, that, so far, no cases have been filled in Polish in 2024.

WB: What are the biggest challenges the Court is currently facing? What future do you envision for the Court? Will its jurisdiction expand? Or maybe there are types of cases that will be brought more often in the future?

MW: Our court faces two main challenges at the time. First, it must ensure that it can deal with mega-cases, such as the large abuse of dominance, state aid, merger or banking cases in a timeframe that meets the parties’ expectations. In the modern digital age, judgments must not only be accurate, but also be delivered fast. The second challenge concerns the transfer of new competencies from the Court of Justice to the General Court. As of October 2024, the General Court will be competent to answer preliminary reference request from national courts in specific subject matters, such as VAT cases in particular. We must be able to deliver judgments in those matters, which are at least as good as those currently delivered by the Court of Justice.

WB: Can you share your personal story with our readers? How to become a judge and the President of the Court? What would you recommend focusing on to a young judge or lawyer with an ambition to become a judge of the EU Court?

MW: My career is a chain of fortuitous circumstances with two constant features. First, I am a European with the conviction that the rule of law is not only the fundament of our freedom and wealth, but also the best way to protect and cherish the diversity of our cultural heritage. The second element is risk taking. If there is an opportunity, you should go for it. I do not know whether this is useful advice for those who would like to become a judge at the General Court or Court of Justice. Nor do I know whether you can plan such a career, since the statistical chance that you can become an EU judge is relatively small. My advice would simply be to work hard, keep your eyes open and seize the opportunities by letting the heart speak.

WB: Is there any specific message you would like our readers (advocates of the Polish Bar) to receive?     

MW: Poland has all the reasons to be a proud and confident nation. It has a key role to play in the decades to come to protect our European way of life in an increasingly hostile international environment. Having a place in the driving seat of the European project is not only a public affair, but also impacts civil society, including its legal community. My recommendation is to be proactive in identifying the rights and possibilities offered by European law and in contributing to the evolution of the European legal order. Poland has the potential to become one of the legal capitals of the Union and it should exploit that potential.