2057 KB105 KB201320242014Berger Škrk, Alenkaštevilka:3/4letnik:69str. 175-209, 283-284ISSN:0032-6976COBISSID:13728593URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-9CIUTK6VslZveza društev pravnikov SlovenijePravnikčlovekove praviceefficiencyEuropean UnionEvropska unijahuman rightslawpravno varstvopravosodna praksaučinkovitostPravica do učinkovitega sodnega varstva in načelo učinkovitosti v pravu EU|The fundamental right to judicial protection from a standpoint of access to justice underpins all rights. Moreover, for private parties the principle of effectiveness (effet utile) and the right to the effective judicial protection are of paramount importance in EU law while enforcing their (substantive) EU rights. Effet utile as a general principle of EU law is always "bound" on the dilemmas of the effective enforcement of EU law, more particularly, on the dilemmas of the judicial protection of EU-based rights through national and also EU remedies. On the other hand, for a proper application of effet utile in practice ECJ's case law is important regarding the interpretation of the fundamental right of effective judicial protection as it derives from the common constitutional traditions of the Member States and Articles 6 and 13 of the European Convention of Human Rights (hereafter ECHR). In this context, the fundamental right of effective judicial protection has to be interpreted and applied as a duty in the hands of the courts to provide effective protection of the rights which individual's derive from EU law. Therefore, there is an evident nexus between the effet utile's requirements and application of individuals right of effective judicial protection. More precisely, the right of the effective judicial protection and the principle of effectiveness of EU law often coincide as the effective remedy offered to the individual for the protection of his EU rights, contributes to enforcing the correct application and the enforcement of EU law. The right to an effective judicial protection through the ECJ's application of Articles 6 and 13 of the ECHR and its further incorporation in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (hereafter the Charter), is therefore individual's powerful tool in the context of claiming that (national) rule has the restrictive effect on (the enforcement) of a particular (mainly substantive) EU right. However, this article is in essence concerned with the integration of the right to an effective judicial protection within a multi-level legal order, namely in the interplay between the Charter, ECHR and national enforcement of this right. Therefore, the right is also compared to the standards as set in Articles 6 and 13 ECHR, Article 47 of the Charter and Article 23 of the Slovene Constitution. The article concludes that despite all the requirements of the right to an effective judicial protection in this multi-level legal system, private parties are (still) facing different procedural constraints in the context of EU law, some of them even leading to situations of the denial of justice. While analysing some concrete suggestions how to ensure a more effective judicial protection of private parties on the EU level, the primarily emphasis is on the EU accession to the ECHRZ vidika dostopa do sodišča temeljna pravica do sodnega varstva omogoča uresničevanje vseh drugih pravic. Za posameznike, ki uresničujejo svoje (materialne) unijske pravice, sta na ravni EU bistvenega pomena načelo učinkovitosti in pravica do učinkovitega sodnega varstva. Načelo učinkovitosti je kot splošno načelo prava EU vedno vezano na dileme učinkovite uporabe prava EU oziroma na vprašanja sodnega varstva unijskih pravic z nacionalnimi in tudi unijskimi pravnimi sredstvi. V praksi pa je za uporabo načela učinkovitosti pomembna sodna praksa Sodišča EU (v nadaljevanju SEU), vezana na interpretacijo pravice do učinkovitega sodnega varstva, kot izhaja iz skupnih ustavnih tradicij držav članic ter iz 6. in 13. člena Evropske konvencije o človekovih pravicah (v nadaljevanju EKČP). Tako se mora pravica do učinkovitega sodnega varstva razlagati kot dolžnost sodnega sistema, da zagotovi učinkovito uresničevanje posameznikovih pravic s področij, ki jih ureja pravo Unije. Tako sta načelo učinkovitosti in uresničevanje posameznikove pravice do učinkovitega sodnega varstva medsebojno logično povezana. Celo več, pravica do učinkovitega sodnega varstva in načelo učinkovitosti se pogosto prekrivata prav v situacijah, ko učinkovito pravno sredstvo zagotavlja tudi ustrezno uporabo prava EU. Pravica do učinkovitega sodnega varstva, kot jo je prek uporabe 6. in 13. člena EKČP izoblikovalo SEU oziroma kot izhaja iz 47. člena Listine Evropske unije o temeljnih pravicah EU (v nadaljevanju Listine), je torej za posameznika pomemben argument pri zatrjevanju, da ima (nacionalno) pravilo restriktivni učinek na uresničevanje njegove (materialne) unijske pravice. Hkrati pa je v članku še posebej obravnavano uresničevanje te pravice z vidika večplastnosti pravnega reda, to je v okviru njenega varstva na ravni prava EU, EKČP in nacionalnega prava. Zato so primerjana izhodišča in standardi 6. in 13. člena EKČP, 47. člena Listine in 23. člena Ustave Republike Slovenije. Posamezniki se kljub vsem zahtevam obravnavane pravice v okviru njenega "večplastnega uresničevanja" na ravni uporabe prava EU še vedno srečujejo z različnimi procesnimi ovirami, ki v končni posledici lahko vodijo tudi do t. i. situacij zanikanja sodnega varstva. Med konkretnimi predlogi za izboljšanje obstoječega stanja sodnega varstva posameznikov na ravni EU je obravnavan tudi pomen pristopa EU k EKČPTEXTznanstveno časopisjejournalsSlovenian National E-content AggregatorNational and University Library of SloveniaUniverza v Ljubljani, Pravna fakulteta