The article discusses the ECOWAS case, C-91/05, Commission v. Council, judgement of 20 May 2008 (Grand Chamber), in relation with its precedents in Cases C-176/03, Environmental Crimes, and C-440/05, Ship Pollution, in order to understand whether it brings along a new approach in the interpretation of Article 47 TEU. It shows that the criteria established in ECOWAS to choose the correct legal basis for cross-pillar measures apply to cases different from those considered in the previous case-law. This provides a sound justification to the only substantial difference spotted between ECOWAS and the two previous judgements, namely the linking to the Treaty on EC (TEC) of measures lacking a particularly strong link to the latter as compared to the Second or Third Pillar (case of concurrent objectives). Like the Ship Pollution case, ECOWAS relies on an interpretation of Article 47 that favours the TEC as required by this provision, while not disregarding the pillared structure of the EU, regardless of what might be argued from its phrasing.[...]
Fino a dove si può spingere il diritto comunitario nell’ambito dell’Unione. Un commento alla sentenza ECOWAS alla luce dei precedenti
PISTOIA, Emanuela
2009-01-01
Abstract
The article discusses the ECOWAS case, C-91/05, Commission v. Council, judgement of 20 May 2008 (Grand Chamber), in relation with its precedents in Cases C-176/03, Environmental Crimes, and C-440/05, Ship Pollution, in order to understand whether it brings along a new approach in the interpretation of Article 47 TEU. It shows that the criteria established in ECOWAS to choose the correct legal basis for cross-pillar measures apply to cases different from those considered in the previous case-law. This provides a sound justification to the only substantial difference spotted between ECOWAS and the two previous judgements, namely the linking to the Treaty on EC (TEC) of measures lacking a particularly strong link to the latter as compared to the Second or Third Pillar (case of concurrent objectives). Like the Ship Pollution case, ECOWAS relies on an interpretation of Article 47 that favours the TEC as required by this provision, while not disregarding the pillared structure of the EU, regardless of what might be argued from its phrasing.[...]I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
