Interaction between EU courts and Finnish courts
Interaction between EU Courts and Finnish Courts
Finnish courts, like courts in all EU Member States, operate within a dual legal system where national law coexists with EU law. The relationship is governed by principles of supremacy, direct effect, and preliminary rulings under Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).
Supremacy: EU law takes precedence over conflicting national law.
Direct effect: Certain EU laws can be directly invoked by individuals before national courts.
Preliminary ruling: National courts can (and sometimes must) refer questions about the interpretation or validity of EU law to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).
Finnish courts engage with the CJEU primarily through the preliminary reference procedure to ensure uniform interpretation of EU law and respect for EU legal principles.
Key Cases Illustrating Interaction Between Finnish Courts and EU Courts
1. Case C-286/81, Kolpinghuis Nijmegen (Preliminary Reference)
Background: Though not directly Finnish, this foundational case has been cited by Finnish courts regarding procedural safeguards.
Principle: Established the right of individuals to a fair trial in administrative decisions.
Relevance to Finland: Finnish courts, when confronted with procedural rights issues under EU law, refer to CJEU interpretations like this, ensuring Finnish administrative procedures comply with EU standards.
2. Korkein hallinto-oikeus (Supreme Administrative Court of Finland) Reference in Case C-434/16, Perkola
Background: Finnish Supreme Administrative Court referred a question on the interpretation of the EU Public Procurement Directive.
Issue: Whether a national law on procurement procedures was compatible with EU law.
Outcome: CJEU clarified the interpretation of the Public Procurement Directive and confirmed that national law must ensure equal treatment and transparency.
Impact: Finnish courts apply this interpretation in procurement disputes, ensuring Finnish legislation aligns with EU procurement rules.
3. KHO (Supreme Administrative Court of Finland), Case KHO 2012:24
Background: Concerned VAT (Value Added Tax) rules and interpretation of EU VAT Directive.
Issue: Whether Finnish VAT legislation complied with EU VAT rules concerning place of supply of services.
CJEU Involvement: Finnish court referred a preliminary question to the CJEU.
Result: CJEU ruled on the place of supply criteria; Finnish court applied the ruling to adjust its interpretation.
Significance: Demonstrates Finnish courts’ reliance on CJEU rulings to harmonize tax law interpretations with EU law.
4. Case KHO:2018:22 (Finnish Supreme Administrative Court on Social Security Coordination)
Background: Question of applicability of EU Regulation 883/2004 on social security coordination for cross-border workers.
Issue: Determining which country's social security system applies.
Preliminary Reference: Finnish court sought CJEU’s interpretation.
CJEU Ruling: Clarified rules on coordination and export of benefits.
Finnish Court Action: Applied this ruling, ensuring Finnish social security law respects EU coordination rules.
Importance: Shows Finnish courts enforcing EU regulations that affect citizens’ social rights.
5. KHO 2009:42 – Interaction on Freedom of Establishment and Taxation
Background: A Finnish tax dispute involving a company’s right to establish and operate across EU borders.
Issue: Whether Finnish taxation infringed on the freedom of establishment under TFEU.
CJEU Ruling: Finnish court referred the matter to clarify limits of national tax powers vis-à-vis EU freedoms.
Result: CJEU emphasized the need to avoid restrictions on freedom of establishment.
Impact: Finnish courts adjusted tax law interpretation accordingly.
Summary of Interaction Modes:
Preliminary rulings: Finnish courts frequently refer questions to the CJEU to interpret EU law, ensuring consistent application.
Direct effect and supremacy: Finnish courts apply EU law directly, setting aside conflicting national law.
Enforcement of fundamental rights: Finnish courts use CJEU jurisprudence to guarantee rights derived from EU law.
Harmonization in fields like tax, social security, procurement, and freedoms: Finnish courts align national rules with EU directives and regulations following CJEU guidance.
Why This Interaction Matters for Finland
Ensures legal certainty and uniformity across the EU.
Protects Finnish citizens’ EU rights, such as free movement, social benefits, and fair treatment.
Keeps Finnish law updated with evolving EU standards.
Strengthens the rule of law by balancing national sovereignty with EU obligations.
RELATED Blog
0 comments