Case 1/58, Stork
1/58, Stork vs. ECSC High Authority, judgment of 4 February 1959 ECR 1959 p. 17 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=en&numdoc=61958J0001
Identified should be:
●
The parties of the case
●
The subject of the case
●
Grounds
●
What did the ECJ decide?
●
Link to human rights in the case?
● Importance of the case against the background of human rights’ protection in Europe
In the case 1/58, Stork, the ECJ refused to exercise judicial review over human rights. Only ten years later (case 29/69: Stauder, referred above), the ECJ changed its case law and exercised such review.
In your opinion, why did the ECJ refuse in Stork? What prompted the change in Stauder?
(With help of: J. H. H. Weiler)
J. H. H. Weiler specifically stresses paragraph 4 in the case Stork:
4. (a) Under Article 8 of the Treaty the High Authority is only required to apply Community law. It is not competent to apply the national law of the Member States. Similarly, under Article 31 the Court is only required to ensure that in the interpretation and application of the Treaty, and of rules laid down for implementation thereof, the law is observed. It is not normally required to rule on provisions of national law. Consequently, the High Authority is not empowered to examine a ground of complaint which maintains that, when it adopted its decision, it infringed principles of German constitutional law […].
What does this paragraph show?