Language and Law: The Role of Language and Translation in EU Competition Law PDF
Preview Language and Law: The Role of Language and Translation in EU Competition Law
Silvia Marino · Łucja Biel Martina Bajčić · Vilelmini Sosoni Editors Language and Law The Role of Language and Translation in EU Competition Law Language and Law (cid:129) Ł (cid:129) č ć (cid:129) Silvia Marino ucja Biel Martina Baj i Vilelmini Sosoni Editors Language and Law The Role of Language and Translation in EU Competition Law Editors SilviaMarino ŁucjaBiel DepartmentofLaw,Economicsand InstituteofAppliedLinguistics Culture UniversityofWarsaw UniversityofInsubria Warsaw,Poland Como,Italy MartinaBajčić VilelminiSosoni FacultyofLaw,DepartmentofForeign DepartmentofForeignLanguages,Translation Languages &Interpretation UniversityofRijeka IonianUniversity Rijeka,Croatia Corfu,Greece TheProjectisco-financedbytheCommissionoftheEuropeanUnion,DGCompetition(Ref.:HT: 4983, Call for proposals 2015: Training of National Judges in EU Competition Law and Judicial CooperationbetweenNationalCompetitionLawJudges). ISBN978-3-319-90904-2 ISBN978-3-319-90905-9 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90905-9 LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2018959222 ©SpringerNatureSwitzerlandAG2018 Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.AllrightsarereservedbythePublisher,whetherthewholeorpartofthe materialisconcerned,specificallytherightsoftranslation,reprinting,reuseofillustrations,recitation, broadcasting,reproductiononmicrofilmsorinanyotherphysicalway,andtransmissionorinformation storageandretrieval,electronicadaptation,computersoftware,orbysimilarordissimilarmethodology nowknownorhereafterdeveloped. Theuseofgeneraldescriptivenames,registerednames,trademarks,servicemarks,etc.inthispublication doesnotimply,evenintheabsenceofaspecificstatement,thatsuchnamesareexemptfromtherelevant protectivelawsandregulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this bookarebelievedtobetrueandaccurateatthedateofpublication.Neitherthepublishernortheauthorsor theeditorsgiveawarranty,expressorimplied,withrespecttothematerialcontainedhereinorforany errorsoromissionsthatmayhavebeenmade.Thepublisherremainsneutralwithregardtojurisdictional claimsinpublishedmapsandinstitutionalaffiliations. ThisSpringerimprintispublishedbytheregisteredcompanySpringerNatureSwitzerlandAG Theregisteredcompanyaddressis:Gewerbestrasse11,6330Cham,Switzerland Contents Introduction:TheRoleoftheLanguageinEULaw. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 SilviaMarino PartI PublicandPrivateEnforcementofEULaw inaCooperativePerspective OnEconomicRationaleofCompetitionPolicy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 FlaviaCortelezzi AnOverviewoftheRecentApplicationofEUandNational CompetitionLawbytheItalianCompetitionAuthority. . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 PaoloCaprile TheCJEUCaseLawAfterPreliminaryRulingonBehalfofPrivate EnforcementofEUCompetitionLaw. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 MarJimeno-Bulnes TheDirectEffectofEUCompetitionLaw:FromRegulation No1/2003toDirective2014/104/EU. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 MarinaSanMartín-Calvo JurisdictionandApplicableLawinFollow-onActions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 PaoloBertoli ContemporaryTrendsinInternationalLawinRelationtotheProtection ofIndividualsfromMultinationals’Malpractice:GreekCompetition LawAftertheImplementationofEUDirective2014/104. . . . . . . . . . . . 103 SotiriosS.Livas EUCompetitionLawintheAftermathofDirective2014/14 andItsImplementationintheRepublicofCroatia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 AnaPošćić v vi Contents EUCompetitionLawAfterDirective2014/104/EU andItsImplementationinItaly. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 SilviaMarino PartII LinguisticAspectsofDrafting,Translating,Interpreting andImplementingEUCompetitionLaw LegalLanguagesinContact:EULegislativeDrafting andItsConsequencesforJudicialInterpretation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163 AgnieszkaDoczekalska LanguageandTranslationinEUCompetitionLaw:Insights fromEnglish,Greek,ItalianandSpanishVersions ofLegislativeTexts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179 VilelminiSosoni AMutualLearningExerciseinTerminologyandMultilingualLaw. . . . 207 MartinaBajčićandAdrijanaMartinović BinomialsinEUCompetitionLaw. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225 KatjaDobrićBasaneže CollocationsofTermsinEUCompetitionLaw:ACorpusAnalysis ofEUEnglishCollocations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249 ŁucjaBiel,AgnieszkaBiernacka,andAnnaJopek-Bosiacka TheGlossaryofEUEnglishCompetitionCollocationsandTerms. . . . . 275 ŁucjaBiel,AgnieszkaBiernacka,andAnnaJopek-Bosiacka PhraseologicalProfileofJudgments:ComplexPrepositions inEUCompetitionLawJudgments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 325 DariuszKoźbiał PlainEnglishandtheEU:StillTryingtoFighttheFog?. . . . . . . . . . . . 359 AriannaGrasso Introduction: The Role of the Language in EU Law SilviaMarino 1 Multilingualism in the EU as a Tool to strengthen Democracy TheEuropeanUnion’s(EU)legalsystemraisesmanychallengesforthelawyer.One ofthoseismultilingualism.Allthelegalactsandmeasuresmustbedraftedinallthe 24officiallanguagesoftheEU.1Itisnotthefirstexampleofamultilingualsystem, butitissurelythemostprominent. Theideabehindthischoice—i.e.theuseofallthenationalofficiallanguagesas EU official languages—is the promotion of the democratic principle within the EU. The possibility to use every official national language is a necessary tool in ordertoputEUcitizensandinstitutionsintocontact.Furthermore,itmakessomeof therightsgrantedbytheEUTreatieseffective. Article24oftheTreatyontheFunctioningoftheEuropeanUnion(TFEU)grants everyEUcitizentherighttoaddresstheEUinstitutionsinanyEUofficiallanguage, and toreceive an answer inthe same language. This right isan integral part ofthe democraticprinciple,sinceitaimsatcreatingastablelinkbetweenthecitizensand theEU.Still,itwouldbearathertheoreticalright,ifthecitizenswereobligedtouse a foreign language. The opportunity to use native languages makes it easier to contacttheEUinstitutionseffectively. The same is true if we think of the rights to file a complaint with the European ombudsman (Article 228 TFEU), and to address a petition to the European Parlia- ment(Article227TFEU). 1RegulationNo1,determiningthelanguagestobeusedbytheEuropeanEconomicCommunity,as amended(OJL17,6.10.1958,p.385). S.Marino(*) DepartmentofLaw,EconomicsandCulture,UniversityofInsubria,Como,Italy e-mail:[email protected] ©SpringerNatureSwitzerlandAG2018 1 S.Marinoetal.(eds.),LanguageandLaw, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90905-9_1 2 S.Marino Furthermore, all the legal binding acts addressed to the general public must be draftedinalltheofficiallanguages.Thisrulesafeguardsthecitizens’righttobeable tounderstandthelaw:everyonecanhaveadirectandeffectiveaccesstothelaw.The CourtofJusticeoftheEuropeanUnion(CJEU)hasalreadymadeitclearthatanEU bindingmeasuredoesnotproduceanyeffectagainstthecitizensofaMemberState, until it is published in the Official Journal in the official language of that Member State.2 EU citizens might have an active role within the EU, too. Under Article 2 of Protocol No 2 on the Application of the Principles of Subsidiarity and Proportion- ality, the Commission shall consult widely before proposing legislative acts. According to the general praxis, the Commission publishes a Green Paper, a non-binding document wherein the institution assesses the problem to be tackled, suggests possible solutions and submits questions to the civil society. Everyone is invited to give their view on the topic, following the guidelines and the queries presentedby the Commission. The right to take part toconsultations would prove, oncemore,highlyineffectiveiftheGreenPaperswerewritten—andiftheanswers wereacceptable—onlyinselectedlanguages. In this framework, the European ombudsman has already made it clear that EU citizensmustbegrantedaneffectiverighttotakeparttoconsultations.3Indeed,itis not reasonable to expect participation without understanding: if the consultations kick-offdocumentsaredraftedonlyinEnglish,allthenon-Englishspeakingcitizens are excluded, thus preventing from reaching the target of a large consultation. If there is no obligation to publish everything in every official language, restrictions mustbeobjectivelyjustified.Limitedfinancialresourcesandtimeconstraintsdonot amount to insurmountable difficulties in order to translate the consultation docu- mentsintoalltheofficiallanguages.Theinstitutionsmustatleastgrantfullorpartial translationsuponrequest,orgivethebasicinformationontheconsultationinallthe EUofficiallanguages. 2 Interpretation of Multilingual Treaties Promoting the democratic principle through the use of native languages creates practicalandeconomicaldifficultiesrelatedtothetranslationandtheinterpretation of all the EU legal binding and general measures. Indeed, the institutions use a selected group of working languages (usually English, French, German, to a more limitedextentSpanishandItalian,andinthenextfuturePolish),andthefirstdraftof legalactsissubmittedinoneofthoselanguages.Nevertheless,thetranspositionof 2CaseC-161/06SkomaLux[2007]ECRI-10841,ECLI:EU:C:2007:773. 3DecisionoftheEuropeanOmbudsmanclosinghisinquiryintocomplaint640/2011/ANagainstthe EuropeanCommission,4October2012.AvailableviaEUROPEANOMBUDSMAN.https://www. ombudsman.europa.eu/en/cases/decision.faces/el/12009/html.bookmark.Accessed15Apr2018. Introduction:TheRoleoftheLanguageinEULaw 3 legal concepts into many languages is not an automatic operation. Every legal concept has aprecisemeaningthat could even notexist altogether inanotherlegal system. The translation must be as accurate as possible: the output is legally not a translation,butanofficial version oftheact. Theexistenceofanumberofofficial versionsmightbringinterpretativeconcernsforthejurist. According to the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of the Treaties, all the officiallanguageshavethesamerelevance.Therefore,theinterpretationofarulein aninternational Conventionmusttake all thelinguistic versionsintodue consider- ation, and look for a meaning that is acceptable in all of them (Article 33 of the Convention). Usually, international Conventions are written in no more than three languages. The United Nations Organisation has six official languages (English, French,Spanish,Russian,Arab,andChinese).ThechallengewithintheEU,withits 24officiallanguages,isapparentlybigger. TheinterpretationofEULawdoesnotdisregardthisfundamentalgeneralruleof international law. Many examples demonstrate that the CJEU analyses different linguisticversionsinordertointerpretthesamerule,inallthefieldswithintheEU competence.One ofthemostrecentandmeaningfulexamplesisthe JZcase.4The primary concern related to the meaning of the word ‘detention’ for the purpose of Article 26(1)oftheframeworkDecision2002/584ontheEuropeanarrest warrant. The Court scrutinised six different linguistic versions (German, Greek, French, English,Polish,andDutch),dividingthemintothreegroups,inordertodemonstrate thattheliteral interpretationwasnotenoughinordertoreachauniquemeaningof theword.Indeed,itgaverisetothreepossibledifferentinterpretationsoftheword.5 3 The Procedure for Preliminary Ruling in the EU In this framework, the relevance of the procedure for preliminary ruling in the EU should be immediately clear. Only a central judicial body can have the necessary competence to duly scrutinise a multilingual text and to analyse its legal meaning and impact. An open oriented and comparative perspective can be more easily granted within a European body: the CJEU’s judges come from all the Member States,andeachofthemcantakeadvantageofthecooperationofotherjurists—as theAdvocatesgeneralandtheircollaborators. This is one of the reasons for the extremely high success of the procedure for preliminary ruling. It is rather impossible for national Courts to face 24 different languages and 28 jurisdictions, given that the meaning of technical words and 4CaseC-294/16JZ[2016]ECLI:EU:C:2016:610. 5ThefirstknowncasewheretheCourtadoptedawide-linguisticapproachexpresslyisthejudgment issuedonCase29/69Stauder[1969]ECR419,ECLI:EU:C:1969:57.Atthetime,theEUcounted onlyfourofficiallanguages,butallofthemwereanalysedinordertounderstandtheexactmeaning of the expression: bon individualisé, buono individualizzato, auf ihren Namen ausgestellten Gitschein,opnaamgesteldebon(seeBajčićandMartinovićinofthisbook). 4 S.Marino expressionsdependsonnationallegaltraditions.Atthesametime,onenationallegal and linguistic tradition cannot prevail over the others: such a solution would be discriminatory and might jeopardise the uniform interpretation and application of EU Law. Therefore, the CJEU has opted for an autonomous interpretation of EU Law.SincetheEUisanownlegalsystemautonomousfromnationaljurisdictions, withspecialandoriginalnature,6itslawcannotbesubjecttonationaltraditionsand legalcategoriesandcannotbeinterpretedaccordingtonationallaw.EULawhasits meaning, which might depend both on the comparison of the various linguistic versions and a legal comparative approach to the meaning of the words and expressions used in such linguistic versions. Furthermore, the judgment is binding ergaomnes,i.e.notonlyontherequestingCourt,butonallthebodiesthatwillneed tointerpretandapplytheruleinthefuture. National judges are well aware of the impact of the procedure for preliminary ruling, as demonstrated by the statistics. In 2017, 533 requests for preliminary rulings were brought, which represents about 30% of all the cases filed with the CJEU(includingtheGeneralCourt). Thistaskissoimportantthatnationalcourtsoflastinstanceareunderadutyto refer a preliminary question to the CJEU (Article 267 TFEU). The rule aims at grantingthecorrectapplicationofEULawinlast-instancecases,sincenoordinary remedy against it is possible, and ‘wrong’ precedents issued by a generally highly distinguishednationalcourtmightneverthelessinfluencethefuturecaselaw. 4 The Acte Claire Principle Thesedutiesarenotwithoutexception.AccordingtotheCILFITjudgment,7inthree cases the duty becomes a faculty: the last instance Court has a full margin of appreciation in order to evaluate the opportunity to refer. One of these exceptions isaparamountexampleoftheroleofmultilingualisminEULaw.Thereisnodutyto refer to the CJEU if the rule to be interpreted and applied is clear. But what does clearmeaninthisframework,with24officiallanguagesandthescatteredapplica- tionofEULaw?Inpara.16theCJEUstatedthat: thecorrectapplicationofCommunitylawmaybesoobviousastoleavenoscopeforany reasonabledoubtastothemannerinwhichthequestionraisedistoberesolved.Beforeit comes to the conclusion that such is the case, the national court or tribunal must be convincedthatthematterisequallyobvioustothecourtsoftheotherMemberStatesand totheCourtofJustice. Thenationalcourtdecidingthecasemustbeconvincedthatthecourtsseatingin other Member States would reach the same interpretative conclusion. It is not enough to refer to the legal categories of each legal system. The judge must also 6Case6/64Costac.ENEL[1964]ECR1141,ECLI:EU:C:1964:66. 7Case283/81CILFIT[1982]3415,ECLI:EU:C:1982:335.
The list of books you might like
