(Judgment of the CJEU in case C‑27/11,Vinkov)
Hristo Kirlov [1]
The article discusses the judgment of the CJEU in case C‑27/11, Vinkov. The Bulgarian Administrative Court-Sofia raised the question, within a preliminary ruling procedure, about the compatibility with EU law and particularly with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights of the non-recognition in national law of the right of appeal of certain administrative sanctions for minor offences.
The particular pecuniary sanction imposed in the present case triggered also automatic deduction of points from Mr Vinkov’s driving licence, which in the view of the national court may eventually lead, following consecutive impositions of similar sanctions, to a temporary driving ban. In this context, the national court looked into the compatibility of rule of national law with Art. 2 of Protocol No 7 to the European Convention on Human Rights; Arts 47 and 48 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights; Arts 67, 82 and 91(1)(c) TFEU; and several provisions of secondary EU legislation.
The article discussed the applicability of cited by the national court legal instruments and the factual background of the case. It gives an overview of the judgment of the Court who found that the reference for a preliminary ruling from the national court must be declared inadmissible. The article examines all aspects of the referred questions. The CJEU stated that the interpretation of the TFEU had no relation to the actual facts of the main action or to its purpose, and that those rules were incapable of applying in the main proceedings; and that the cited EU secondary law was not applicable either because Bulgaria had not made a declaration by which it accepted the Court’s jurisdiction in criminal matters; the invoked principle of mutual recognition was not applicable either since the case did not contain a cross-border element; and that it was not apparent from the order for reference that the national legislation constituted a measure implementing EU law or that it was connected in any other way with EU law.
The article concludes with some general remarks about the case law of CJEU on the admissibility of preliminary references concerning purely internal situations in connection to the applicability ratione matariae of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. The analysis focuses on the case law of the CJEU in specifying the concepts of “a measure implementing EU law” and draws attention to the inclusion in Vinkov of the phrase “or that it is connected in any other way with EU law”. This analysis is made in the light of the explanations on Article 51(1) of the Charter and Article 6(1) TEU of the Paesidium of the Convention which drafted the Charter, as well as the judgments of the CJEU in cases С-360/09, Pfleiderer and C‑617/10, Åkerberg Fransson.
***
Линк към цялата статия на български език: ВРЪЗКАТА С ПРАВОТО НА ЕС КАТО УСЛОВИЕ ЗА ПРИЛОЖИМОСТ НА ХАРТАТА НА ОСНОВНИТЕ ПРАВА НА ЕС: ИЛИ ЗАЩО НЕ ВСИЧКИ ПЪТИЩА ВОДЯТ ДО ЛЮКСЕМБУРГ
***
[1] LL.M. in European Union Law (Madrid and Paris).
