Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introduction: Background

  • Chapter
The European Stability Mechanism Before the Court of Justice of the European Union

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Law ((BRIEFSLAW))

Abstract

The Pringle case is to be welcomed, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU or the Court), in its full composition, thoroughly examined the core provisions of the European Monetary Union (EMU) (Articles121–127 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union or TFEU).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Council Regulation (EC) n°1466/97 of 7 July 1997 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies (OJ L 209, p. 1) and Council Regulation (EC) n°1467/97 of 7 July 1997 on speeding up and clarifying the implementation of the excessive deficit procedure (OJ L 209, p. 6).

  2. 2.

    Case C-27/04, Commission v Council, [2004] ECR I-6649.

  3. 3.

    See Bandilla (2005), pp. 538–549 sp. 541; Chaltiel (2004), pp. 509–514, sp. 512; Häde (2004), pp. 750–764, sp. 752; Henseler (2004), pp. 541–558, sp. 554; Maher (2004), pp. 831–841, sp. 833; Presutti (2005), pp. 65–81, sp. 77–78.

  4. 4.

    Council Regulation (EC) n°1055/2005 of 27 June 2005 amending Regulation (EC) n°1466/97 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies, (OJ L 174, p. 1) and Council Regulation (EC) n°1056/2005 of 27 June 2005 amending Regulation (EC) n°1467/97 on speeding up and clarifying the implementation of the excessive deficit procedure (OJ L 174, p. 5).

  5. 5.

    Council Regulation (EU) n°407/2010 of 11 May 2010 establishing a European financial stabilisation mechanism (OJ L 118, p. 1).

  6. 6.

    EUROSTAT, Press release euro indicators, 60/2011, 26 April 2011.

  7. 7.

    OJ 2011 L 91, p. 1.

  8. 8.

    Regulation (EU) n° 1175/2011 of 16 November 2011 amending Council Regulation (EC) n°1466/97 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies (OJ L 306, p. 12) and Council Regulation (EU) n°1177/2011 of 8 November 2011 amending Regulation (EC) n° 1467/97 on speeding up and clarifying the implementation of the excessive deficit procedure (OJ L 306, p. 33).

  9. 9.

    See Louis (2011), pp. 353–367, sp. 360; Louis (2006), pp. 85–106, sp. 101; see also, Amtenbrink and De Haan (2006), pp. 402–413, sp. 405.

  10. 10.

    See Allemand and Martucci (2012), pp. 17–99, sp. 97.

  11. 11.

    Regulation (EU) n°1173/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the effective enforcement of budgetary surveillance in the euro area (OJ L 306, p. 1), Regulation (EU) n°1174/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on enforcement measures to correct excessive macroeconomic imbalances in the euro area (OJ L 306, p. 8) and Regulation (EU) n°1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances (OJ L 306, p. 25).

  12. 12.

    Council Directive 2011/85/EU of 8 November 2011 on requirements for budgetary frameworks of the Member States, (OJ L 306, p. 41).

  13. 13.

    See Adamski (2012), pp. 1319–1364, sp. 1337.

  14. 14.

    See Napolitano (2012), pp. 461–469, sp. 465.

  15. 15.

    Louis (2012b), pp. 284–320, sp. 306.

  16. 16.

    Louis (2012a), pp. 57–83, sp. 61.

  17. 17.

    EUROSTAT, Press release euro indicators, 150/2012, 24 October 2012.

  18. 18.

    German Federal Constitutional, (BVerfG 2-BvR 1390/12, 2-BvR 1421/12, 2-BvR 1438/12. 2-BvR 1439/12, 2-BvR 1440/12 and 2-BvE 6/12), Judgment of 12 September 2012 on the ratification of the ESM and the STACOG Treaty; Schorkopf (2012a), pp. 554–562, sp. 561; (same article in German Schorkopf (2012b), pp. 1273–1276); Wollenschläger (2012), pp. 713–719, sp. 716.

  19. 19.

    See Barrett (2011), pp. 152–155.

  20. 20.

    Häde (2012), pp. 421–439.

  21. 21.

    See for instance Case C-533/08, TNT Express, [2010] ECR I-4107, paras 60 and 61 and Case C-132/09, Commission v Belgium, [2010] ECR I-8695, para 43 cited also by the Court in the Pringle case, para 78.

  22. 22.

    Recently, the Court has ruled in full composition in order to deliver an Opinion (procedure of article 218§11 TFEU), which is a specific procedure laid down by the treaty (Opinion 1/09, Draft Agreement creating a Unified Patent Litigation System, [2011] ECR I-1145.

  23. 23.

    Simon (2013), pp 17–20.

  24. 24.

    Case T-496/11, UK v ECB and case T-45/12 UK v ECB.

  25. 25.

    Case T-224/12, Accorinti e.a. v ECB.

  26. 26.

    Case T-492/12, von Storch e.o. v ECB.

References

  • Adamski D (2012) National power games and structural failures in the European macroeconomic governance. CMLRev:1319–1364

    Google Scholar 

  • Allemand F, Martucci F (2012) La nouvelle Gouvernance économique européenne. CDE:17–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Amtenbrik F, De Haan J (2006) Reforming the stability and growth pact. ELR:402–413

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandilla R (2005) Ist der Stabilitäts- und Wachstumspakt rechtlich durchsetzbar? Anmerkungen zum Urteil des Gerichtshofes in der Rechtssache Kommission/Rat (C-37/04). In: Zuleeg M, Gaitanides C, Kadelbach S, Rodriguez Iglesias GC (eds) Festschrift für Manfred Zuleeg. Nomos, Baden–Baden, pp 538–549

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett G (2011) The treaty amendment on the European stability mechanism: does it require a referendum in Ireland? Irish Law Times:152–155

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaltiel F (2004) Le pacte de stabilité, entre exigences juridiques et pragmatisme politique. À propos de l’arrêt du 13 juillet 2004. RMCUE:509–514

    Google Scholar 

  • Häde U (2004) Der EuGH und die Haushaltsdisziplin—Das Urteil vom 13.7.2004 zum Verfahren bei einem übermäßigen Defizit. EuR 2004:750–764

    Google Scholar 

  • Häde U (2012) The Treaty of Lisbon and the Economic and Monetary Union. In: Blanke H-J, Mangiameli S (eds) The European Union after Lisbon, Constitutional basis, economic order and external action. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 421–439

    Google Scholar 

  • Henseler P (2004) Galgenfrist für den Stabilitätspakt—Interinstitutionelle Handlungsspielräume von Rat und Kommission im Verfahren bei einem übermäßigen Defizit nach Auffassung des EuGH. ZEuS 2004:541–558

    Google Scholar 

  • Louis J-V (2006) The Review of the Stability and Growth Pact. CMLRev:85–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Louis J-V (2011) Editorial: Les réponses à la crise. CDE:353–367

    Google Scholar 

  • Louis J-V (2012a) L’Union économique et monétaire de Maastricht à la crise. RAE/LEA:57–83

    Google Scholar 

  • Louis J-V (2012b) The unexpected revision of the Lisbon treaty and the establishment of a European stability mechanism. In: Ashiagbor DC (ed) The European union after the treaty of Lisbon. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 284–320

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Maher I (2004) Economic policy coordination and the European court: excessive deficits and ECOFIN discretion. ELR:831–841

    Google Scholar 

  • Napolitano G (2012) La nuova governance economica europea: il meccanismo di stabilita ed il Fiscal Compact. GDAmm:461–469

    Google Scholar 

  • Presutti E (2005) La Corte di giustizia e il patto di stabilità e di crescita: commento alla sentenza del 13 luglio 2004. DCDSI:65–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Schorkopf F (2012a) Start the engines. Comment on the ESM-judgment of the German Federal Constitutional Court of 12 September 2012. MJ (Maastricht University):554–562

    Google Scholar 

  • Schorkopf F (2012b) Startet die Maschinen: das ESM-Urteil des BVerfG vom 12.9.2012. NVwZ:1273–1276

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon D (2013) Mécanisme européen de stabilité (MES). Europe:17-20

    Google Scholar 

  • Wollenschläger F (2012) Völkerrechtliche Flankierung des EU-Integrationsprogramms als Herausforderung für den Europa-Artickel des Grundgesetzes (Article 23 GG). NVwZ:713–719

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Secretariat General/Legal Department, Banque Centrale de Luxembourg, Boulevard Royal 2, 2983, Luxembourg, Luxembourg

    Etienne de Lhoneux

  2. Legal Department, Banque Centrale du Luxembourg, Boulevard Royale 2, 2983, Luxembourg, Luxembourg

    Christos A. Vassilopoulos

Authors
  1. Etienne de Lhoneux
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christos A. Vassilopoulos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Etienne de Lhoneux .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

de Lhoneux, E., Vassilopoulos, C.A. (2014). Introduction: Background. In: The European Stability Mechanism Before the Court of Justice of the European Union. SpringerBriefs in Law. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01478-4_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation