tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post2200179485795698265..comments2024-03-28T16:45:51.051+00:00Comments on The IPKat: IPKat threatens European and judicial serenityVerónica RodrÃguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-13138345336551927862011-09-21T23:20:06.066+01:002011-09-21T23:20:06.066+01:00Jeremy,
You should look at the judgment in the ca...Jeremy,<br /><br />You should look at the judgment in the cases cited (C-514/07 et al - http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:62007CJ0514:EN:HTML). Although the blocking response from the Commission conveniently doesn't mention it, paras 107-136 indicate that the position is quite different after judgment, in that many of the restrictions on transparency fall away.<br /><br />Also note that the Commission's submissions are summarised in the report for the hearing (made available at the hearing and also available from the Court's press office, albeit only in the language of the case - they are no longer translated and published in the ECR) and the Commission typically makes oral submissions at the hearing which is public. On that basis, there would also seem to be an argument (against the ECJ's findings in C-514/07, paras 92-94) that the Commission's submission should be made available at least in part after the oral hearing, to the extent that the basis for non-disclosure has been removed by the report for the hearing or the oral hearing itself. Given the substantial time delay of many months between hearing and judgment, that could be important, although the Commission will most likely still resist such disclosure by claiming that it is not required to disclose a scintilla more than was in the report for the hearing and the oral submissions, in order to maintain the total serenity of the court proceedings. But perhaps you might be able to get the pleading notes from the Commission, which are the basis for its oral submissions (and are provided to the translators).<br /><br />ChrisChristopher Stothershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12947357073108439568noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-58987147401752830672011-09-21T22:27:03.357+01:002011-09-21T22:27:03.357+01:00Anonymous at 10:13PM -
Whether or not any party ...Anonymous at 10:13PM - <br /><br />Whether or not any party in any CJEU reference discloses a copy of a document is not the point. Why should the public have to resort to having to find a willing party in a CJEU reference who would be kind enough to show them the submissions? The issue that is being fought for is that everyone should be able to see the submissions of how institutions of the EU and Member States interpret the law that they expect the public to be bound by and which theoretically factors in the decision making of the CJEU.<br /><br />Its a pretty basic principle of open justice and transparency, and I for one, do not understand why access to documents are being shielded for "serenity" reasons, unless there are legitimate public interest reasons. <br /><br />Can you imagine if the Courts here closed the statements of case for all cases because they wanted to be able to ensure that the proceedings were taking place in "an atmosphere of total serenity"? You've seen the fuss about that in respect of some media cases....<br /><br />I can see the Daily Mail headline now....Annsley Merelle Wardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09184706067469338128noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-4594409113062776782011-09-21T22:13:05.098+01:002011-09-21T22:13:05.098+01:00"The problem isn't one of getting to see ..."The problem isn't one of getting to see a copy -- it's a problem of getting the Commission to let me see it!"<br /><br />I'm confused. Someone else (eg CIPA) will let you see a copy, but you're spurning that offer in order to request a copy off the Commission instead? And then moaning when they won't?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-88709867738660951352011-09-21T16:59:37.559+01:002011-09-21T16:59:37.559+01:00This said, unlike the Kat, I can see how revealing...This said, unlike the Kat, I can see how revealing the opinion of one set of bureaucrats about another set of bureaucrats could shatter the serenity of both sets.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-24665878754874296982011-09-21T16:57:28.491+01:002011-09-21T16:57:28.491+01:00"an atmosphere of total serenity"
Sir H..."an atmosphere of total serenity"<br /><br />Sir Humphrey would be proud of that reply.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-88663912639536735142011-09-21T11:42:20.855+01:002011-09-21T11:42:20.855+01:00@Anonymous 11:33am
The problem isn't one of g...@Anonymous 11:33am<br /><br />The problem isn't one of getting to see a copy -- it's a problem of getting the Commission to let me see it!Jeremyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01123244020588707776noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-3735256437486567632011-09-21T11:33:03.875+01:002011-09-21T11:33:03.875+01:00Could you try asking CIPA for a copy?Could you try asking CIPA for a copy?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-92171518713899265072011-09-21T11:19:25.796+01:002011-09-21T11:19:25.796+01:00Fighting the good fight is always hard work. It is...Fighting the good fight is always hard work. It is always necessary to go it alone because of a lack of substantive support as opposed to "go for it Jeremy" style comments. This is why it is never possible to achieve change with such organisations, governments, groups societies etc. But good luck anyway, and keep us posted.<br /><br />Am I correct in thinking such information would be made readily available in the USA and maybe we can learn something from them?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-83749644880409041712011-09-21T10:13:24.415+01:002011-09-21T10:13:24.415+01:00My comment that you should try the European Ombuds...My comment that you should try the European Ombudsman seems to have got lost, so I'm posting it again. You could of course try an appeal to the General Court, but the Ombudsman might be less complicated and more sympathetic. I would be very interested to see what comes of such a complaint.<br /><br />Another possibility which occurs is to try CJEU itself. The rules of procedure are not, unlike our CPR, quite so clear on the rules about access to the court's own document. <br /><br />As far as I can see, they would be in the hands of the registrar (if I'm reading the rules aright) but the Instructions to the Registrar are silent on what (if anything) they should do if asked to produce a statement filed by one of the institutions.<br /><br />Again, I'd love to see what happens if you do ask. Keep us posted.Francis Daveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10228026893626221724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-78564571956073664852011-09-20T16:45:42.222+01:002011-09-20T16:45:42.222+01:00Cannot say that I blame the IPKat for tampin',...Cannot say that I blame the IPKat for tampin', as they say round here, bud.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-4792727797164444152011-09-20T14:22:04.652+01:002011-09-20T14:22:04.652+01:00I daresay the size of the readership of this blog ...I daresay the size of the readership of this blog should attest to the public interest.<br /><br />The attitude shown makes me question if there is any basis for the extension to the due date. Were I to extend my due dates in the same high handed style I would quickly find myself in hot water with no sympathy from the deadline setting authorities.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com