THE 2015 EU JUSTICE SCOREBOARD

Transcription

1 THE 215 EU JUSTICE SCOREBOARD Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Central Bank, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Justice and Consumers

2 European Commission - Directorate-General for Justice Printed in Belgium

3 Dear Reader, The EU Justice Scoreboard provides an overview of the quality, inde- with individual country assessments, the EU Justice Scoreboard helps to The European Commission supports these reform processes through the ronment, providing greater regulatory predictability and thereby contribu- - - Commissioner for Justice, Consumers and Gender Equality

4 The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 4

5 Contents 1.INTRODUCTION INDICATORS OF THE 215 EU JUSTICE SCOREBOARD KEY FINDINGS OF THE 215 EU JUSTICE SCOREBOARD ADDRESSING THE DATA GAP CONCLUSIONS...45 The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 1

6 1. INTRODUCTION The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 2

7 Figure 1 Mapping of justice reforms in the EU in 214 European Commission General reform strategy Council for the Judiciary Judicial profession (judges & court staff) ICT in the judiciary Administration of courts Procedural law Re-designing of the judicial map Legal aid Court reorganisation court competences) Court fees ADR methods Legal professions The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 3

8 5 6 dialogue with Member States group of contact 7 8 The The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 4

9 What is the EU Justice Scoreboard? How does the EU Justice Scoreboard feed the European Semester? 1 What is the methodology of the EU Justice Scoreboard? The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 5

10 2. INDICATORS OF THE 215 EU JUSTICE SCOREBOARD The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 6

11 Figure 2 * CEPEJ study SI DK AT PL HR EE CZ SK HU LT RO NL ES IT PT EL BG DE CY LV SE MT LU BE IE UK * Figure 3 * CEPEJ study BE EL HR CZ CY IE RO ES LT PT SI SK PL IT LV DE HU EE AT MT DK LU SE BG NL UK * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 7

12 3. KEY FINDINGS OF THE 215 EU JUSTICE SCOREBOARD Length of proceedings 15 Figure 4 * CEPEJ study DK EE PL AT LT CZ BG HU NL SI RO HR SE LU LV SK IT DE ES CY EL MT PT BE IE UK * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 8

13 Figure 5 * CEPEJ study LU LT EE AT DK HU SE CZ RO DE PL LV ES SI HR PT EL SK IT CY MT BE BG IE NL UK * Figure 6 * CEPEJ study 5 RO BG PL HU SI SE EE NL LU LV LT DE ES HR SK CY EL MT BE CZ DK IE IT AT PT UK * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 9

14 3.1.2 Clearance rate Figure 7 * CEPEJ study 18% 16% 14% 12% 1% 8% 6% 4% 2% % LU EE RO IT MT HR SI PL BG AT SE DK DE NL HU LV CZ PT LT SK ES CY EL BE IE UK * Figure 8 * CEPEJ study 2% 18% 16% 14% 12% 1% 8% 6% 4% 2% % LU IT RO MT EE DK PT SI HR AT SE ES DE LT HU LV CZ PL SK EL CY BE BG IE NL UK * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 1

15 Figure 9 * CEPEJ study 18% 16% 14% 12% 1% 8% 6% 4% 2% % LV EL RO ES BG HU SI SE NL PL DE LU EE SK LT HR CY MT BE CZ DK IE IT AT PT UK * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 11

16 3.1.3 Pending cases Figure 1 Number of * CEPEJ study LU SE BG LT HU LV NL DK MT EE RO CZ PL CY AT DE IT SK EL ES HR SI PT BE IE UK * Figure 11 Number of * CEPEJ study LU SE DK AT EE HU DE LT PL LV CZ MT RO SI ES PT SK HR IT EL CY BE BG IE NL UK * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 12

17 Figure 12 Number of * CEPEJ study LU BG EE LV HU PL SI MT HR LT NL RO SK SE ES DE CY EL BE CZ DK IE IT AT PT UK * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 13

18 17 Figure 13 * IE BE DK UK NL AT DE ES CY LV IT LT LU HU PT SI SE CZ EE MT PL HR BG RO EL SK June 21 June 213 June 214 * 17 The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 14

19 18 19 Competition law 2 Figure 14 competition authorities applying Articles 11 and 12 TFEU* BE CZ DK DE EL ES IT LV LT HU AT PL PT RO SI SK SE UK 1st instance 212 2nd instance 212 1st instance 213 2nd instance 213 * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 15

20 True consumer protection Figure 15 consumer protection authorities* BG CZ DK EE EL ES HR IT CY LV LT HU NL PL PT RO SI SK 1st instance 212 2nd instance 212 1st instance 213 2nd instance 213 * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 16

21 22 Community trademark Figure 16 Community trademark* lectual property rights BE BG DK DE EE IE ES LV LT LU HU MT AT PL PT RO SI SK SE CZ EL IT CY NL UK 1st instance 212 2nd instance 212 1st instance 213 2nd instance 213 * 22 The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 17

22 Public procurement rules Figure 17 public procurement rules applied* pilot study BE BG CZ DK DE EE IE EL ES IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT RO SI SK SE UK 1st instance (uncouloured columns refer to data from non-judicial bodies) 2nd instance rd instance * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 18

23 The third edition of the EU Justice Scoreboard seeks to identify possible trends it appears that The positive 3 mon trend in the length of proceedings The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 19

24 3.2 Quality of justice systems Figure 18 * CEPEJ study DK EE ES LV LT HU AT PL RO SI BE BG DE EL HR IT CY NL PT SK CZ MT SE IE LU UK Number of incoming cases Number of decisions Number of postponed cases Length of proceedings (timeframes) Other elements * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 2

25 Figure 19 * CEPEJ study NONE EL ES NL SI SK EE HR HU PL CZ DK DE IT LV LT AT PT RO SE BG IE CY MT BE LU UK Performance and quality indicators system Quality standards defined Specialised court staff entrusted * Figure 2 * CEPEJ study NONE DK DE IE AT RO SE LT NL SI EE ES HU BE IT LV PL PT BG CZ EL HR CY LU MT SK UK * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 21

26 3.2.2 Information and communication technology systems help to reduce the length of proceedings and to facilitate access to justice Figure 21 ICT Systems for the registration and management of cases* CEPEJ study - DK EE LT HU MT NL AT PT SI SE ES IT RO BG DE LV PL SK HR LU IE BE CZ CY EL UK * Figure 22 Electronic communication between courts and parties* CEPEJ study EE LV LT MT NL AT PT CZ SE DE IT LU SI RO IE ES DK PL SK BG HU HR CY EL BE UK * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 22

27 Figure 23 CEPEJ study CZ DE EE LV LT MT NL AT PT SI SE IT LU IE EL ES HU PL RO BE BG DK HR CY SK UK NONE Figure 24 CEPEJ study NONE CZ EE LV LT MT NL AT PT RO SK SE IT SI DE HU IE EL ES HR PL BE BG DK CY LU UK The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 23

28 small claims procedure The 11 th Figure EE MT PT IE LV AT PL BE IT SE NL LU HR DK UK BG EL LT CZ DE ES RO SI CY SK HU Appeal against court decision Obtain information on case handling Starting a small claim procedure (issue the money claim at the court) Obtain information on related legislation and rights 11 th The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 24

29 3.2.3 Courts communication policies This Figure 26 * European Commission BE BG DK DE EE HR LV LT NL PL PT RO SE IT CZ IE HU AT SI SK EL LU CY MT ES UK The judiciary is responsible for keeping information up-to-date Information on cost of proceedings Information on legal aid Information on how to bring a case to court General information about the justice system NO DATA * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 25

30 Figure 27 Relations between courts and the press/ media* European Commission BE BG DK DE EE LT LU HU NL RO HR LV SK CZ AT SI PL SE PT CY EL IE IT MT ES UK NONE NO DATA Judiciary has established guidelines on communication with the press and media for judges * st st Figure 28 * European Commission DE LV LT LU HU NL AT SI DK RO BG HR CZ EE PL SE BE EL IE IT MT PT CY SK ES UK NONE Communication with the media and general public (continuous) Communication with the media and general public (initial) Communication with the parties (continuous) Communication with the parties (initial) Writing skills (continuous) Writing skills (initial) * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 26

31 Figure 29 Access to published judgements online* European Commission BG EE IE HR LV LT LU HU NL AT SK BE DE RO CZ PL MT SI EL CY PT DK IT SE ES UK Access to published judgments is free of charge Information in the database is updated at least once a month * st Figure 3 Access to published judgements online* European Commission BG DE EE IE LV HU NL SK CZ EL RO HR CY LT LU MT SI PT PL SE BE DK AT IT ES UK NONE Access to published judgements is free of charge Information in the database is updated at least once a month * st The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 27

32 Figure 31 Practices regarding the publications of judgments online* European Commission DE LT NL AT SK BG CZ LU LV EL BE MT RO SI HU HR EE PL PT DK IT CY SE IE ES UK NONE The publication of judgments is made on the basis of selection criteria Judgments are assigned an ECLI identifier (or will be in the future) Judgments are tagged with key words Judgments are anonymised * st Figure 32 * European Commission DE NL CZ BG LV LT SI SK HR HU EL RO EE LU PT PL CY DK SE MT IE AT BE IT ES UK The publication of judgments is made on the basis of selection criteria Judgments are assigned an ECLI identifier (or will be in the future) Judgments are tagged with key words Judgments are anonymised NONE * st The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 28

33 Figure 33 Promotion of the use of ADR by the public sector* European Commission HR LT PL DE PT IT NL RO BE HU EE IE SI SE CY EL SK LU LV DK MT AT CZ BG ES UK labour disputes consumer disputes * NO DATA Figure 34 * European Commission NONE NO DATA DE SI HR LT HU RO EE NL PL SE PT SK BG IT CY LU AT CZ DK IE LV BE MT EL ES UK labour disputes consumer disputes * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 29

34 Figure 35 * Eurobarometer survey 1% 8% 6% 4% 2% % BE BG CZ DK DE EE IE EL ES HR IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT RO SI SK SE UK ADR bodies Courts Public authorities Other channels * Figure 36 Compulsory training for judges in 213* CEPEJ study NONE IE EL LT HU DE EE ES NL BE LV PL PT RO SI BG CZ DK HR IT LU AT SK CY MT SE UK Initial training * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 3

35 Figure 37 * (as a % of total number of 5 18% 16% 14% 12% 1% 8% 6% 4% 2% % SI EE CZ SE UK (EN+ WL) LT LV AT DK RO IT IE ES NL SK PT UK EL PL BG BE HU DE HR CY LU MT (SC) Percentage of continuous judicial training * Resources Figure 38 Budget for courts* CEPEJ study LU DE AT BE SI SE NL PT IT DK HR EL PL CZ CY HU MT SK ES EE LV IE RO LT BG UK * 5 The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 31

36 Figure 39 * CEPEJ study NL SE IE DK BE LU DE PT EE IT SI AT CZ LT CY BG EL LV RO SK HR HU MT ES PL UK * Figure 4 * Eurostat LU UK DE SE NL AT SI DK ES IT IE MT PT EL PL CZ LV HU BG CY LT EE RO BE HR SK * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 32

37 Figure 41 Eurostat BG SI UK PL HU PT DE LV IT ES CZ EL LT MT NL AT SE RO IE LU DK EE CY BE HR SK Figure 42 Number of lawyers* CEPEJ study LU EL IT CY ES PT MT IE DE BG BE HU RO PL DK HR NL SK CZ AT SI LT EE LV SE UK * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 33

38 Figure 43 Number of judges* CEPEJ study SI HR LU EL BG CZ HU LT PL SK DE LV RO PT AT EE BE NL CY SE ES IT MT DK IE UK * Figure 44 * CEPEJ study geographical locations 51 courts as legal entities 3% 2% 1% % -1% -2% -3% -4% NO VARIATION NO DATA -5% IT NL IE EL AT BG LT PT DE RO BE CZ DK EE LV LU HU MT SK SE CY SI HR PL ES UK * 51all courts as geographical locations The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 34

39 3.2.7 Share of female professional judges 52 Figure 45 European Commission and CEPEJ study 9% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% % BE BG CZ DK DE EE IE EL ES HR IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT SI RO SK SE UK 1st instance (213) 2nd instance (213) supreme court (214) Figure to 214* European Commission and CEPEJ study 3% 25% 2% 15% 1% 5% % -5% -1% -15% LU IT EL LT MT RO IE CY PT SK AT DE ES NL SI BE DK PL EE UK HR BG CZ LV SE HU 1st instance 2nd instance supreme court * 52 The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 35

40 Conclusions on the quality of justice systems systems. In the majority of the Member States more than 2% of judges participated in continuous training on EU law or on the law of other Member States. use of ADR methods increase the use of ADR methods. The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 36

41 3.3 Independence Figure 47 * (2) (3) (6) (7) (1) (12) (15) (17) (18) (19) (28) (33) (4) (44) (45) (54) (56) (58) (62) (7) (71) (78) (84) (91) (97) (1) (126) (13) DK IE UK NL LU DE SE BE EE AT MT PT CY PL HU LV CZ EL LT IT RO SI ES HR BG SK data data data * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 37

42 3.3.2 Structural independence Figure 48 Composition of the Councils for the Judiciary according to the nomination process* % 5% % BE BG DK IE ES IT CSM IT CPGA LV LT MT NL PL PT RO SI SK UK (EN + WL) UK (NI) UK (SC) * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 38

43 Figure 49 Powers of the Councils for the Judiciary* 59 BE BG DK IE ES IT LV LT MT NL PL PT RO SI SK UK (EN Promoting a judge + WL) Adopting ethical standards Deciding on disciplinary decisions concerning judges Transferring judges (without their consent) Dismissing judges (1st instance courts) Proposing dismissal of judges (1st instance courts) Appointing judges (1st instance courts) Proposing candidate judges for appointment (1st instance courts) UK (NI) UK (SC) * Figure 5 * 6 BE BG CZ DK DE EE IE EL ES HR IT CSM CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT RO SI SK SE UK (EN Other body defines criteria Parliament defines criteria Judiciary defines criteria * st st + WL) UK (NI) UK (SC) 59 6 The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 39

44 Figure NOT ALLOWED NOT ALLOWED BE BG CZ DK DE EE IE EL ES HR IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT RO SI SK SE UK (EN + WL) Transfer for other reasons Transfer for disciplinary reasons UK (NI) UK (SC) * The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 4

45 Figure 52 * BE BG CZ DK DE EE IE EL ES HR IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT RO SI SK SE UK (EN + WL) Decision by the Parliament Proposal by the Parliament UK (NI) UK (SC) * 65 The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 41

46 Figure 53 The allocation of cases within a court Figure 54 The withdrawal and recusal of a judge 68 rity 69 7 BE BG CZ DK DE EE IE EL ES HR IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT RO SI SK SE UK (EN + WL) UK (NI) UK (SC) BE BG CZ DK DE EE IE EL ES HR IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT RO SI SK SE UK (EN + WL) UK (NI) UK (SC) The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 42

47 Figure 55 The procedures in case of threat against the independence of a judge BE BG CZ DK DE EE IE EL ES HR IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT RO SI SK SE UK (EN + WL) UK (NI) UK (SC) Conclusions on judicial independence councils powers and composition. judicial networks to deepen their assessment The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 43

48 4. ADDRESSING THE DATA GAP Figure 56 European Commission 73 1% 9% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% % BE BG CZ DK DE EE IE EL ES HR IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT RO SI SK SE UK information on efficiency information on quality information on independence The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 44

49 5. CONCLUSIONS The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 45

50 Country Codes BE BG CZ DK DE EE IE EL ES FR HR IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT RO SI SK FI SE UK UK UK UK Belgium Bulgaria Denmark Germany Estonia Ireland Greece Spain France Croatia Italy Cyprus Lithuania Hungary Malta Netherlands Austria Poland Portugal Romania Finland Sweden United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom United Kingdom The 215 EU Justice Scoreboard 46

51

52