Legal Method Examination

Authors Avatar

Legal Method Examination

Q.1 Read the attached judgment of the European Court of Justice (“ECJ”) in R v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and Regions ex parte First Corporate Shipping Ltd [2000] I-9235 and answer the following question:

  1. What are the number of the case and the name of the parties?

The case number is C-371/98 and the parties to the case are the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions and the appellants, First Corporate Shipping Ltd.

  1. What is the structure of the judgment? How does it differ from that of English Courts?

A European judgment lays out the points of the judgment in numbered form.  Sections are divided by clear headings after the facts of the case have been stated.  The main priority in a European judgment is setting out “The Community legislation” at first-hand.  In the present case of ex parte First Corporate Shipping Ltd, the directive is set out according to which articles are relevant to the case followed by the full facts of the case and question brought forward for a preliminary ruling.  In English courts, the judgment differs in that the full facts of the case are stated followed by the reasoning of the previous courts and the relevant case law. The judges then take turns to give their separate judgments which may be dissenting or assenting the plaintiff’s case.  In a European court, after the question for preliminary ruling from the domestic court of the member state has been quoted, the court in a list of numbered points answers it.  This gives a much clearer layout than in an English court, as there is not separate interpretation from judges or conflicting decisions.  It can also be argued that a European court judgment would be more consistent in their decisions as they do not rely on Common law, which can sometimes prove inconsistent in English Courts.  Finally in a European judgment, the court calculates the costs, and a paragraph summary of the decision is presented in bold.  Comparatively, an English court would set out in italics, a few words as to whether the decision was allowed, or quashed.  

  1. Where did the case arise and how did it reach the European Court of Justice?  What is a preliminary ruling under Art. 234 of the EC Treaty?
Join now!

The case arose in the Queen’s Bench Division (Divisional Court) of the High Court of Justice of England and Wales.  The conflict arose when the Secretary of State proposed the Severn Estuary, an area owned by the Bristol port authority, First Corporate Shipping company, as a site requiring special protection due to the wild birds under the European Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979.  Under Article 4(1), the area was classified as an SAC of the Habitats Directive, which would ultimately affect the port authority’s development of the area.  First Corporate Shipping Company argued that the Secretary of ...

This is a preview of the whole essay