tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post2546911522016067096..comments2024-03-28T16:45:51.051+00:00Comments on The IPKat: References to the Court of Justice: more time, transparency neededVerónica Rodríguez Arguijohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05763207846940036921noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-10597347609680910952011-08-15T20:57:04.102+01:002011-08-15T20:57:04.102+01:00In part this reflects frustration (and lack of und...In part this reflects frustration (and lack of understanding) arising from the ECJ’s continued insistence on the confidentiality of written observations and other documents in pending proceedings. For my part, I think that the strict approach to confidentiality looks increasingly at odds with the openness which the ECJ’s case law is promoting in relation to access to documents of other EU institutions (see e.g. for a recent judgment http://www.brickcourt.co.uk/news/08-08-2011---access-to-documents-in-competition-law-proceedings.asp). Not to mention difficult to reconcile with principles of open justice, Article 6 etc. Ripe for challenge? Especially when the ECJ accedes to the Convention?<br /><br />I am not aware of central government having a formal process for regularly consulting stakeholders about pending references in other fields. Does this happen in other areas?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-2126312836637919272011-08-11T16:51:44.020+01:002011-08-11T16:51:44.020+01:00It is interesting to contrast the cited passages f...It is interesting to contrast the cited passages from the IPO's reply and their ECJ page, with various statements in the Government Response to the Hargreaves review: <br /><br />Page 3 bottom of col 1; <i>"The fundamental issue however is that key data is held by businesses and other organisations. IPO will work with those organisations to help them offer good-quality evidence: our challenge to them is to do so."</i><br /><br />Page 4 first col <i>"Evidence is a key part of making the UK's case in international fora and with other governments..."</i><br /><br />5 working days is hardly consistent with the Government's stated objective of helping organisations to offer "good quality evidence" .Ronnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-72151366094286051022011-08-11T14:15:05.343+01:002011-08-11T14:15:05.343+01:00Input into the debate from interested parties via ...Input into the debate from interested parties via the legislative process is fine and dandy and a necessary pre-requisite to democracy. <br /><br />But doesn't intervention into a debate, or indeed the fact of an extenal debate being invited at all, sit a bit oddly at least from the perspective of a common law seapartion of powers tradition?<br /><br />We should expect the courts to pass legal judgment based on the law, not on the way the political wind is blowing by some majority vote of political inputs from third parties. Even if, in doing so, they rule against something we'd like.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-12551115322149039172011-08-11T11:39:14.735+01:002011-08-11T11:39:14.735+01:00I agree with the transparency points but, wrt to t...I agree with the transparency points but, wrt to time allowed for comments, referrals are usually published well in advance of the UKIPO invitation to comment. So interested parties can begin preparing their submissions well before the anticipated e-mail fixes a deadline for supplying them to the UKIPO.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5574479.post-83053962848584473002011-08-11T10:50:51.835+01:002011-08-11T10:50:51.835+01:00Thank you for hihlighting this topic. You hit the ...Thank you for hihlighting this topic. You hit the nails on the heads with the issues that you flag. Whether the UK will intervene at all, and indeed what position it will take are totally non-transparent, effectively preventing any ability to try and get a decision reversed. <br />There appears to be a bias towards not intervening, at least in part based on cost. If the UK is to become more assertive internationally and in the EU then this would clearly be a place to start.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com