La sentenza della Corte di giustizia nel caso Orizzonte Salute e il sistema italiano di contributi unificati cumulativi nei ricorsi in materia di appalti pubblici: ogni persona, che possa permetterselo, ha diritto di accesso alla giustizia?

European Papers

Matteo Pisi¹ 

[1] Università di Firenze;

关键词: public contracts;    impact of eu law over national law;    procedural autonomy;    principles of equivalence and effectiveness;    right to access to justice;    art. 47 of the eu charter of fundamental rights;   

DOI  :  10.15166/2499-8249/21

来源: DOAJ

【 摘 要 】

(Series Information) European Papers - A Journal on Law and Integration, 2016 1(1), 245-261 | European Forum Insight of 16 April 2016 | (Table of Contents) I. Introduzione. - II. La giurisprudenza della Corte in materia d'autonomia procedurale e le spese di giudizio come ostacolo ad una tutela giurisdizionale effettiva. - III. La questione pregiudiziale. - IV. Le conclusioni dell'Avvocato generale. - V. La pronuncia della Corte di giustizia nel caso Orizzonte Salute. - VI. Osservazioni conclusive. | (Abstract) This Insight focuses on the recent judgment of the Court of Justice in Orizzonte Salute (case C-61/14). The Court was asked to clarify whether EU Law - more particularly Art. 1 of Directive 89/665/EEC of the Council on the coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply, and public works contract, the principles of effectiveness and equivalence and Art. 47 of the Charter - precludes a national legislation which requires the payment of high amounts as the standard court fee to access judicial review proceedings relating to the award of public supply and public works contracts subject to Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts. In the same case, the Court was also requested to clarify whether European Union (EU) Law precludes a national legislation which charges multiple court fees to an individual who brings several court actions concerning the same award or who raises supplementary pleas concerning the same award within ongoing judicial proceedings. The Insight starts with a brief summary of the case law of the EU Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights regarding, respectively, the principle of procedural autonomy of the Member States and the fundamental right to access to justice, the latter examined in its relationship with the imposition of court fees. Then, it proceeds to review the arguments of the referring Court, the opinion of the Advocate General and the judgment of the EU Court of Justice. The last part of this Insight criticises the choice of the Court to favour - in the interpretation of Directive 89/665 - the procedural autonomy of EU member States over the pursuit of a better level of coordination between national procedural rules, even in a field so deeply harmonised like the one of public procurements.

【 授权许可】

Unknown