header-logo header-logo

29 April 2013
Issue: 7558 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

ECJ needs more judges

Current backlog of cases “unacceptable”

Peers have called for more judges and a further three Advocates-General to be appointed to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to clear an “unacceptable” backlog of cases.

There are currently 27 judges and eight Advocates-General at the ECJ. A report by the Lords Justice, Institutions and Consumer Protection EU sub-committee, published this week, noted that intellectual property cases take an average of 20 months to be decided by the General Court, while other actions take an average 33 months.

The number of new cases before the court almost doubled between 2000 and 2010, although recent figures show a reduction in the number of pending cases.

Lord Bowness, Committee chair, said: “The number of pending cases before the court continues to rise year on year.

“It is crucial that the right balance is struck between the length of time it takes for the court to dispose of a case and the quality of its judgments, in order to preserve its credibility.”

The sub-committee recommended an increase in the number of advocates general in 2011, and the ECJ has since requested an increase. However, before the UK government can vote in the European Council to support this, it needs to have resolutions to that effect from both Houses of Parliament. In this week's report, Workload of the Court of Justice of the European Union: Follow-up Report, the sub-committee urges the government to speed this process up.

 

Issue: 7558 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll