EU judicial system

Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis

This subtopic contains a range of resources on the EU judicial system and the interpretation and enforcement of EU law.

The European Commission’s role as 'Guardian of the Treaties' is to control the correct application of EU law across EU Member States, while upholding the interests of the EU. The Court of Justice of the European Union interprets EU law in the cases submitted by the Commission and national courts.

Cases heard by the Court of Justice of the European Union include:

  1. •

    preliminary ruling requests from national courts on the interpretation of a point of EU law

  2. •

    proceedings against a Member State’s government for failing to fulfil an obligation under EU law

  3. •

    proceedings by an affected Member State or individual party (or the Council, Parliament or Commission) to annul EU law

  4. •

    proceedings by a Member State against an EU institution for failing to act

  5. •

    direct actions by EU citizens, companies or organisations, which have suffered damage as a result of the action or inaction of the EU

State liability in EU law derives from the fact that EU Member States are

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Existing user? Sign-in TAKE A FREE TRIAL
Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Public Law News

Public Law weekly highlights—19 June 2025

This week's edition of Public Law weekly highlights includes: Lord Reed delivers a significant ‘institutionalist’ speech on trust in the courts in a populist age, the UK-EU political agreement on Gibraltar establishing a customs union between the EU and Gibraltar, alongside criticism of the treaty scrutiny process in Parliament, with Dame Emily Thornberry calling it “rubbish” during a Commons debate. Also in this edition, a major speech from Lord Chancellor Shabana Mahmood about the ECHR. Case law updates include the Administrative Court’s dismissal of judicial review claims against VAT on private school fees, finding the Finance Act 2025 changes justified in human rights law terms, and the High Court’s rejection of an injunction sought against protestors who opposed the EHRC’s stance following the Supreme Court’s ruling in For Women Scotland Ltd v Scottish Ministers, with the court finding no imminent risk of trespass. This edition features further updates on Brexit highlights, Brexit SIs, Post-Brexit guidance, Constitutional and administrative law, Judicial review, Equality and human rights, State security and intelligence, Information law, Subsidy control and State aid.

ECHR committee recommends Hugh Mercer KC as next UK judge

The Committee on the Election of Judges to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has recommended Hugh Mercer KC as the leading candidate for the position of UK judge at the court. The recommendation will now go forward to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe for final election. Mercer, a barrister at Essex Court Chambers, was identified by the committee as the most qualified candidate from the UK nominations.

Misuse of AI in court and the consequences (Ayinde v Haringey & Al-Haroun v Qatar National Bank)

Dispute Resolution analysis: The Divisional Court has ruled on the consequences of misusing artificial intelligence (AI) in court proceedings. Following two referrals arising from actual or suspected misuse of generative AI by lawyers, the court used its inherent powers to enforce the duties owed by lawyers to the court (the Hamid jurisdiction). The judgment provides vitally important guidance to practitioners on their duties to the court and to their professional regulators when using AI. It also explains the sanctions likely to apply for misuse of AI including public admonishment, strike out and costs sanctions, referrals to regulators, contempt of court and, in the most egregious cases, referral to the police for criminal investigation. The judgment also provides a comprehensive index of cases from around the world where fake citations (or other misleading material) have been placed before the court. Written by Harriet Campbell, senior knowledge lawyer at Penningtons Manches Cooper LLP.

Judicial Review—High Court quashes decision refusing recusal application (R (Ladybill) v Sheffield Magistrates’ Court & Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council)

Public Law analysis: The High Court has ruled that the fair-minded and informed observer would be entitled to conclude that there was a real possibility that the decision of a district judge (‘the judge’) in the Magistrates’ Court was likely to be influenced by the desire to decide the Ladybill case in a way which validated, after the event, his earlier decision in a case called Emeraldshaw. The challenge was brought by way of judicial review in respect of the judge’s decision dated 23 May 2024, refusing to recuse himself from hearing proceedings between Ladybill and Rotherham Borough Council (‘the interested party’). Prior to that the judge had handed down a decision dated 21 March 2024 in the case of Sheffield City Council v Emeraldshaw Ltd, which was a claim by the council for payment of non-domestic rates alleged to be owing in respect of periods between June 2021 and November 2022. The judge found that Emeraldshaw was liable to pay the rates and Emeraldshaw sought to challenge the decision by way of judicial review. Emeraldshaw and Ladybill are companies within the MCR Property Group. Developments in the Emeraldshaw case later catalysed an application made on behalf of Ladybill that the judge should recuse himself from hearing the Ladybill case. The High Court found that there was a real possibility that the judge was biased. Written by Rowena Wisniewska Sethi, barrister at 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square Chambers.

View Public Law by content type :  
News
Practice notes
Precedents
Q&As

Popular documents

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companies

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companiesWhy does it matter?A company that is a member of a group and has incurred any of the types of losses available for surrender by way of group relief may, without any further rules, have more than one way in which to use the loss. There are a

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the current registered owner? Or does the informal exoneration only apply to the parties to the document which informally exonerated the rentcharge?This Q&A considers the situation where, at some

Contributory negligence in personal injury claims

Contributory negligence in personal injury claimsContributory negligence is a partial defence which can lead to a discount in damages.Other defences may also be relevant. See Practice Notes: Did the claimant consent to the risk of injury? and Was the claimant involved in an illegal activity?If a

Glossary—Latin legal terms

Glossary—Latin legal termsDespite attempts in recent years to simplify the language used in legal cases, there are still a number of Latin phrases commonly used in personal injury claims. The following Latin phrases are listed in alphabetical order:Latin
Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companies

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companies

Priority between loss reliefs in loss making companiesWhy does it matter?A company that is a member of a group and has incurred any of the types of losses available for surrender by way of group relief may, without any further rules, have more than one way in which to use the loss. There are a

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the

If a rentcharge is shown as being informally exonerated on title information, does this apply to the current registered owner? Or does the informal exoneration only apply to the parties to the document which informally exonerated the rentcharge?This Q&A considers the situation where, at some

Contributory negligence in personal injury claims

Contributory negligence in personal injury claims

Contributory negligence in personal injury claimsContributory negligence is a partial defence which can lead to a discount in damages.Other defences may also be relevant. See Practice Notes: Did the claimant consent to the risk of injury? and Was the claimant involved in an illegal activity?If a

Glossary—Latin legal terms

Glossary—Latin legal terms

Glossary—Latin legal termsDespite attempts in recent years to simplify the language used in legal cases, there are still a number of Latin phrases commonly used in personal injury claims. The following Latin phrases are listed in alphabetical order:Latin