Benelux Court of Justice

Last updated
Benelux Court of Justice
Formation1 January 1974
Type Intergovernmental organization, court of the Benelux countries
Headquarters Luxembourg
Coordinates 49°37′05″N6°08′46″E / 49.6181485°N 6.1461076°E / 49.6181485; 6.1461076
Membership
Belgium, Netherlands and Luxembourg
Official languages
Dutch and French
President
J. De Codt
1st Vice President
E.J. Numann
2nd Vice President
L. Mousel
Website official website

The Benelux Court of Justice (Dutch : Benelux Gerechtshof, French : Cour de Justice Benelux) is a court which is common to the Benelux countries Belgium, Netherlands and Luxembourg. The organisation was established by the treaty of 31 March 1965. [1] The court's budget rests with the Benelux Union and is of 9 judges of the supreme courts as well as (since 2017) 6 judges of the courts of appeal of the three countries. The court is mainly tasked with answering requests for preliminary rulings from the supreme courts regarding regulations which are common to the three countries and serves as a civil service tribunal for personnel of the Benelux Economic Union and the Benelux Organization for Intellectual Property (BOIP), although it may also be tasked with advising the three governments, and with direct judicial tasks following the entry into force in 2016 of a 2012 protocol to the treaty.

Contents

Organization

Since December 2016, the activities are organized in three chambers:

The court furthermore has three advocates general, that give advisory opinions in certain cases. [2] The use of three chambers within an international court have been modelled on the organisation of the Court of Justice of the European Union (where the First Chambre can be compared to the European Court of Justice, the Second Chambre to the General Court and the Third to the -former- Civil Service Tribunal). [3]

Competence

The court has competence to answer questions regarding laws which are common to the three countries. The competence needs to be explicitly designated in a multilateral treaty, a decision or recommendation of the Committee of Ministers of the Benelux Union. [4] The court has divided the opinions it has given in nine categories: [5]

Decisions

As of 2014, the court has given 228 judgments: 173 preliminary rulings, 43 decisions as a civil service tribunal, 1 advisory opinion and 1 decision regarding the rules of the court. [5]

Status in the European Union

The court is considered a "court common to several member states" of the European Union, and thus forms part of the European legal order. The court therefore can request a preliminary ruling to the European Court of Justice for the application of European Union law, also when it needs such a ruling in order to answer requests for preliminary rulings itself, asked by supreme courts of Benelux countries. [6] The European Court of Justice decided so in a 1995 case (C‑337/95, Parfums Christian Dior). [6] [7] In the latter case, the European Court of Justice ruled that in the interpretation of the Uniform Benelux Law on Trade Marks, both the Supreme Court of the Netherlands and the Benelux Court of Justice (the authority to give preliminary rulings upon requests from the supreme courts regarding this Benelux law) were under an obligation to ask for a preliminary ruling in the interpretation of EU legislation. [6]

The Court for the first time requested a preliminary ruling in 2000 in the case Campina Melkunie v Benelux-Merkenbureau (C-265/00) regarding the rejection of the registration of the Benelux-trademark application by Campina of Biomild. [8] In this case the Supreme Court of the Netherlands had referred on 19 June 1998 nine questions to the Benelux Court of Justice, and in order to answer three of those, it made a request to the European Court of Justice. The 3 questions were answered by European Court of Justice on 12 February 2004, and the Benelux Court of Justice answered the 9 questions on 1 December 2004. The Supreme Court of the Netherlands in turn gave its ruling, based on those answers on 27 January 2006. [9] The court upheld the rejection of the registration of the trade mark. [9]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Benelux</span> Western European politico-economic union

The Benelux Union, also known as simply Benelux, is a politico-economic union and formal international intergovernmental cooperation of three neighboring states in western Europe: Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg. The name is a portmanteau formed from joining the first few letters of each country's name and was first used to name the customs agreement that initiated the union. It is now used more generally to refer to the geographic, economic, and cultural grouping of the three countries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">European Court of Justice</span> Supreme court in the European Union, part of the Court of Justice of the European Union

The European Court of Justice (ECJ), formally just the Court of Justice,, is the supreme court of the European Union in matters of European Union law. As a part of the Court of Justice of the European Union, it is tasked with interpreting EU law and ensuring its uniform application across all EU member states under Article 263 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).

An advocate general of a state is a senior officer of the law. In some common law and hybrid jurisdictions the officer performs the function of a legal advisor to the government, analogous to attorneys general in other common law and hybrid jurisdictions. By contrast, in the European Union and some continental European jurisdictions, the officer is a neutral legal advisor to the courts.

Same-sex marriages are not performed in Aruba, Curaçao, or Sint Maarten, which are constituent countries of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. The islands were obliged after several court rulings to register any marriage registered in the Kingdom, but this primarily considers residency rights and they do not have to give same-sex marriages the same legal effect as opposite-sex marriages. Marriage in the European territory of the Netherlands, as well as in the Caribbean municipalities of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba, is open to any two people irrespective of sex.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme Court of the Netherlands</span> Highest court of the Kingdom of the Netherlands

The Supreme Court of the Netherlands, officially the High Council of the Netherlands, is the final court of appeal in civil, criminal and tax cases in the Netherlands, including Curaçao, Sint Maarten and Aruba. The Court was established on 1 October 1838 and is located in The Hague.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Court of Cassation (Belgium)</span>

The Court of Cassation of Belgium is the supreme court of the Belgian judiciary. The court is composed of thirty judges with life tenure who are nominated by the High Council of Justice of Belgium and appointed by the Belgian federal government. The court handles cases in the two main languages of Belgium, Dutch and French, and provides certain facilities for cases in German. The court is assisted in its work by a public prosecutor's office and a bar association, which both function separately from other structures. The duty of the public prosecutor's office is to provide advisory opinions to the court on how the law ought to be interpreted and applied. The attorneys of the court's bar association assist litigants in proceedings before the court; in certain cases, their assistance is mandatory.

The Benelux Office for Intellectual Property (BOIP) is the registration office for trademarks and designs in Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg. The BOIP is the legal successor of the Benelux Trademarks Office and the Benelux Designs Office. The BOIP is based at The Hague, Netherlands.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dissolution of the Netherlands Antilles</span> 2010 dissolution of the autonomous Caribbean country of the Netherlands

The Netherlands Antilles was an autonomous Caribbean country within the Kingdom of the Netherlands. It was dissolved on 10 October 2010.

Van Gend en Loos v Nederlandse Administratie der Belastingen (1963) Case 26/62 was a landmark case of the European Court of Justice which established that provisions of the Treaty Establishing the European Economic Community were capable of creating legal rights which could be enforced by both natural and legal persons before the courts of the Community's member states. This is now called the principle of direct effect. The case is acknowledged as being one of the most important, and possibly the most famous development of European Union law.

A preliminary ruling is a decision of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on the interpretation of European Union law that is given in response to a request from a court or a tribunal of a member state. A preliminary ruling is a final determination of European Union law, with no scope for appeal. The ECJ hands down its decision to the referring court, which is then obliged to implement the ruling.

The trial of Geert Wilders, a member of the House of Representatives of the Netherlands, took place in the Netherlands in 2010 and 2011. Wilders was accused of criminally insulting religious and ethnic groups and inciting hatred and discrimination. He was found not guilty in June 2011.

The Amsterdam sex crimes case is a court case involving Robert Mikelson's abuse of babies in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. The defendant was Roberts Mikelson, dubbed "the Monster of Riga" by the Dutch press, who had worked at several daycare centres in Amsterdam and was accused of abusing 87 children as well as possession, production and distribution of child pornography. Mikelson was found guilty and sentenced to 18 years and 11 months in prison, followed by involuntary commitment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Unified Patent Court</span>

The Unified Patent Court (UPC) is a common patent court open for participation of member states of the European Union, and created by the "Agreement on a Unified Patent Court", which is provisionally applicable since 19 January 2022. Once the UPC Agreement will be in force, the UPC will hear cases regarding infringement and revocation proceedings of European patents that are valid in participating member states. A single court ruling will be directly applicable in the member states that have ratified the UPC Agreement. The UPC Agreement was signed as an intergovernmental treaty in February 2013 by 25 states. It will enter into force on the first day of the fourth month after meeting three predefined conditions. Provisional application of the UPC Agreement was triggered on 19 January 2022 to enable preparation for the proper functioning of the court after entry into force. While the United Kingdom originally ratified the agreement, it withdrew from the UPC in 2020, following Brexit.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judiciary of Belgium</span> Court system overview

The judiciary of Belgium is similar to the French judiciary. Belgium evolved from a unitary to a federal state, but its judicial system has not been adapted to a federal system.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Treaty establishing the European Stability Mechanism</span>

The Treaty Establishing the European Stability Mechanism was signed by the member states of the eurozone to found the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), an international organisation located in Luxembourg, to act as a permanent source of financial assistance for member states in financial difficulty, with a maximum lending capacity of €500 billion. It replaced two earlier temporary EU funding programmes: the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) and the European Financial Stabilisation Mechanism (EFSM). All new bailouts of eurozone member states will be covered by ESM, while the EFSF and EFSM will continue to handle money transfers and program monitoring for bailouts previously approved for Ireland, Portugal and Greece.

<i>Deckmyn v Vandersteen</i>

Johan Deckmyn and Vrijheidsfonds VZW vs Helena Vandersteen, Christiane Vandersteen, Liliana Vandersteen, Isabelle Vandersteen, Rita Dupont, Amoras II CVOH and WPG Uitgevers België is a preliminary ruling by the European Court of Justice. The reference concerned what conditions must be met for a derivative work to be considered a parody. Parodies are allowed under the Information Society Directive, in those countries that have indicated to apply the parody exception. The European Court of Justice indicated that the definition of the copyright exceptions was consistent throughout the EU and that to qualify the work must "evoke an existing work, while being noticeably different from it, and secondly, to constitute an expression of humour or mockery". The humour or mockery does not need to be directed towards the work itself, but it can also be mockery of something/someone else. When considering a parody-case the court should strike a fair balance between the rights of the rights holders of the original work, as the maker of the parody.

Patent law in Aruba is mainly governed by the Patents Regulation, the law governing the Aruban patent. The Dutch government indicated in 2007, that the patent regulation was, to a large extent identical to the Rijksoctrooiwet.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Referendums in the Netherlands</span>

In the Netherlands, from the entry into force of the Advisory Referendum Act on 1 July 2015, until its repeal on 18 February 2018, most types of primary laws could be subjected to a suspensory, non-binding referendum if requested shortly after royal assent and subsequent proclamation. If a law was rejected by more than half of the votes cast, with a mandatory turnout of at least 30%, its entry into force was be suspended indefinitely and a follow-up law had to be enacted that either repealed the law or provided for its entry into force.

GS Media BV v Sanoma Media Netherlands BV and Others (C-160/15) is a case decided by the European Court of Justice. The case regards a request for a Preliminary ruling by the Supreme Court of the Netherlands on whether hyperlinking to a public third-party website that contains work(s) published without the consent of the rightholder constitutes a "communication to the public" within the meaning of article 3 of the Copyright Directive.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitutional Court of Sint Maarten</span> Constitutional Court in Sint Maarten

The Constitutional Court of Sint Maarten is a court of Sint Maarten. As a constitutional court it evaluates the constitutionality of the provisions of legislation which is approved by the Estates of Sint Maarten and signed into law, but which has not entered into force. Procedures by the court may be initiated only by the ombudsman of Sint Maarten. As of July 2016, the court has decided two cases. Sint Maarten is the only country in the Kingdom of the Netherlands with a constitutional court.

References

  1. ↑ "Algemene voorstelling van het Benelux-Gerechtshof". Benelux Court of Justice (in Dutch). Retrieved 16 June 2014.
  2. ↑ "Verdrag betreffende de instelling en het statuut van een Benelux-Gerechtshof, Brussel, 31-03-1965". Government of the Netherlands (in Dutch). Retrieved 23 June 2014.
  3. ↑ "33 543 Protocol tot wijziging van het Verdrag van 31 maart 1965 betreffende de instelling en het statuut van een Benelux-Gerechtshof; Luxemburg, 15 oktober 2012". Government of the Netherlands (in Dutch). Retrieved 16 June 2014.
  4. ↑ "Deux notions a précizer". Benelux Court of Justice (in French). Retrieved 2 July 2014.
  5. 1 2 "Consultatie van de arresten en conclusies". Benelux Court of Justice (in Dutch). Retrieved 2 July 2014.
  6. 1 2 3 "Judgement of the Court 4 November 1997(1)". European Court of Justice . Retrieved 4 July 2014.
  7. ↑ Matthew Paris. "International Courts and the European Legal Order". European Journal of International Law. Archived from the original on 2 January 2013. Retrieved 23 June 2014. "Since the Benelux Court is a court common to a number of Member States, situated, consequently, within the judicial system of the European Union, its decisions are subject to mechanisms capable of ensuring the full effectiveness of the rules of the European Union
  8. ↑ "Opinion of Mr Advocate General Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer delivered on 31 January 2002. Campina Melkunie BV v Benelux-Merkenbureau". European Court of Justice. Retrieved 4 July 2014.
  9. 1 2 Dutch : ECLI:NL:HR:2006:AU4618
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.