Remedies for infringements of EU law in legal relationships between private parties
Einde inhoudsopgave
Remedies for infringements of EU law in legal relationships between private parties (LBF vol. 18) 2019/6.3.5:6.3.5 Necessity of a civil remedy
Remedies for infringements of EU law in legal relationships between private parties (LBF vol. 18) 2019/6.3.5
6.3.5 Necessity of a civil remedy
Documentgegevens:
mr. I.V. Aronstein, datum 01-09-2019
- Datum
01-09-2019
- Auteur
mr. I.V. Aronstein
- JCDI
JCDI:ADS141374:1
- Vakgebied(en)
EU-recht / Algemeen
Burgerlijk procesrecht / Algemeen
Toon alle voetnoten
Voetnoten
Voetnoten
Cf. in the Court of Justice’s case law on effective judicial protection for example: CJ 9 March 2010, Joined Cases C-379/08 and C-380/08 (ERG), para. 86. CJ 9 February 2012, Case C-210/10 (Urbán), para. 24. CJ 22 March 2017, Joined Cases C‑‑497/15 and C‑‑498/15 (Euro-Team), para. 40. See also Opinion Cruz Villalón 26 November 2013, Case C-314/12 (UPC), paras. 98-109.
Cf. Schwarze 1992, p. 857. Schwarze 2009, p. 903.
Cf. Groussot 2006, p. 149. See §6.3.6.
Deze functie is alleen te gebruiken als je bent ingelogd.
289. In principle, the necessity element of the proportionality principle concerns two questions. First, whether there are less onerous alternatives at hand, and, second, whether the remedy does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the legitimate objective pursued.1 If there are no less onerous alternatives at hand and if the remedy is not excessive, the measure is assumed to be necessary to achieve the aim pursued.2 The second question frequently overlaps with the element of proportionality stricto sensu, which in such cases is considered at the same time as the necessity of the measure.3
6.3.5.1 Civil remedies are necessary6.3.5.2 The civil remedies may not be excessive