POSITION OF THE ARBITRATION TRIBUNALS IN THE EU LEGAL ORDER
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The EU Treaties provide that only courts and tribunals from Member States may raise a question on the interpretation and validity of EU law to the Court of Justice of the EU (267 EU). The reference for a preliminary ruling is an important procedure whose aim is cooperation between judges at national and European level in order to ensure uniform application of EU law. The Court of Justice should reconsider its interpretation of Article 267 TFEU and allowed arbitration tribunal to put question. On that way, will be preserve unique and compact system of European law. On the other hand, the arbitration tribunals from non member states in every case don’t have competence to put question before European Court of Justice.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Basedow J., “EU Law in International Arbitration : Referrals to the European Court of Justice”, Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law Research Paper Series, 15/16, 2015, 367-386.
Cole T. et al, The Legal Instruments and Practice of Arbitration in the EU, A Study for the Directorate General for Internal Policies Policy Department C: Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, European Union, Brussels 2014, 1-312.
Ćeranić J., Oblici povezivanja država članica u Evropskoj uniji, Beograd 2011.
Ćeranić J., “Pravna priroda EU na osnovu Ugovora iz Lisabona”, Aktuelna pitanja savremenog zakonodavstva, Budva 2012, 303-318.
Haardt W.L., “Widow Vaassen-Gobbels v. Board of the Beambtenfonds voor het Mijnbedrijy (“Tund of Employees in the Mining industry”), 4 Common Market Law Review, 1967, 443–444
Hartley T., “The Brussels I Regulation and arbitration”, International and Comparative Law Quaterly, 63 (4). 2014, 843-866.
Knežević G., Pavić V., Arbitraža i ADR, Beograd 2010.
Perović J., Standarde klauzule u međunarodnim poslovnim ugovorima, Beograd 2014.
Vukadinović R., Vukadinović Marković J., Uvod u institucije i pravo Evropske unije, Kragujevac 2016.
Vukadinović Marković J., Uloga arbitrabilnosti u procesu rešavanja sporova pred međunarodnom trgovinskom arbitražom, doktorska disertacija, Beograd
Pravni izvori
Directive 2013/11/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2009/22/EC (Directive on consumer ADR) ( Uredba br. 2013/11/EU Evropskog Parlamenta i Saveta od 21 Maja 2013.o alternativnom načinu rešavanja potrošačkih sporova).
Regulation (EU) No 524/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on online dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2009/22/EC (Regulation on consumer ODR) (Uredbu br. 524/2013 (EU) o online rešavanju potrošačkih sporova.
The Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, (Njujorška konvencija o priznanju i izvršenju stranih arbitražnih odluka, Službeni list SFRJ- Međunarodnu ugovori, br. 11/81).
Treaty on European Union, (Ugovor Evropske unije) Offcial Journal C 326, 26/10/2012 P. 0001 – 0390.
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, (Ugovor o Funkcionisanju Evropske unije,), Offcial Journal C 326 , 26/10/2012 P. 0001 – 0390.
UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, (UNCITRAL Model zakon o međunarodnoj trgovinskoj arbitraži iz 2006. godine)
Nemački Zakonik o parničnom postupku od 5.12.2005. (Zivilprozessordnung - ZPO), Bundesgesetztblatt, str. 3202, 2006 I str. 431, 2007 I str. 1871, poslednje izmene od 10. 10. 2013., tekst dostupan na engleskom na: https://www.gesetzeim-nternet.de/englisch_zpo/englisch_zpo.html, 12. 3. 2018.
Sudska i arbitražna praksa
Ascendi Beiras Litoral e Alta, Auto Estradas das Beiras Litoral e Alta SA v Autoridade Tributária e AduaneiraAscendi, C- 377/13.
Dorsch Consult Ingenieurgesellschaft mbH v Bundesbaugesellschaft Berlin mbH, C-54/96.
Handels- og Kontorfunktionærernes Forbund I Danmark v Dansk Arbejdsgiverforening, C- 109/88.
Merck Canada Inc. v Accord Healthcare Ltd and Others, C- 555/13.
Nordsee Deutsche Hochseefscherei GmbH v Reederei Mond Hochseefscherei Nordstern AG & Co. KG and Reederei Friedrich Busse Hochseefscherei Nordstern AG & Co. KG. C- 102/81.
Pretore di Cento i Pretura Unifcata di Torino, http://guidagenerale.maas.ccr.it/document.aspx?uri=/repertori/R096290.
Pierre Corbiau v Administration des contributions, C-24/92.
Vaassen-Göbbels v Management of the Beambtenfonds voor het Mijnbedrijf, C- 61/65.
Internet izvori
Gaffney J., Do We Need Separative European Regulation of Arbitration, http://www.cepani.be/sites/default/files/images/john_gaffey_-_warsaw_ciarb_paper_-_fnal.pdf, 20.3.2018.
Terkildsen D., Lysholm Nielsen S., Arbitral Tribunals and Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – The Danish By-Pass Rule, http://dandersmore.com/sites/default/files/files/Terdilksen-Nieslen_AYIA_2012.pdf, 20.03.2018.