European Union Law ( EU Law) - The national courts' function
After requesting a preliminary ruling, the national courts are expected to consider it in light of the circumstances of the case and render a decision. However, in the 2003 case of Arsenal FC v. Reed (Case C-206/01) [2003] Ch 454, Laddie J. of the English High Court declined to apply a preliminary judgement of the ECJ that he himself had requested. This case is now considered to be a landmark in legal history. The Arsenal Football Club claimed that Matthew Reed had violated its trademarks by selling scarves and jerseys outside of Highbury Stadium in north London that included the club's shield and cannon insignia. Laddie J had asked for a preliminary judgement about the interpretation of several clauses in Directive 89/104 during the course of the subsequent trademark infringement case. When the decision was made, however, Laddie J ruled that the ECJ had overstepped its interpretative jurisdiction and had reached certain factual conclusions (with which he disagreed) regarding the issue of whether or not Arsenal fans would be likely to mistake Reed's unofficial merchandise for Arsenal's official merchandise. If Laddie J was right, he was quite within his rights to draw this conclusion because, strictly speaking, the ECJ is only intended to render decisions regarding the interpretation of specific provisions of EU law. It was, nevertheless, a contentious choice. The partnership between the ECJ and the High Court avoided a serious crisis, nonetheless. After losing in the High Court, Arsenal FC moved to the Court of Appeal, which overturned Laddie J's ruling and determined that the ECJ had not exceeded its authority. As a result, the Court of Appeal fully applied the preliminary verdict and found in favor of Arsenal.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Kembara's Legal InfosInfos about legal issues and legal concepts that are available online . Archives
February 2023
Categories
All
|