Formation of the judicial office in the EU: last tendencies




European Union, judicial system of the European Union, European integration, judicial appointment, CJEU Advocates General.


The effectiveness of the functioning of the judiciary in the European Union depends on many factors, among which the way of formation of judicial office, namely the appointment of judges and Advocates General of the Court of Justice and of the General Court, should be highlighted. In this regard, the article explores the procedures of formation of the judicial office in the EU and the procedural innovations that have emerged after theLisbonreform.  Prior to the reform, judges and Advocates General were appointed by common agreement of the governments of the Member States and this process was of a closed nature, since the nomination of candidates belongs to the internal competence of the Member States. After theLisbonchanges, the appointment takes place only after consultation with a special panel that makes a conclusion on the suitability of the candidates.  Despite the fact that the conclusions of the panels are of a recommendatory character, the Member States follow them and, in the case of a negative opinion, remove the candidate from the ballot.  Separately, the criteria for evaluating candidates are considered, of which the panel distinguishes six main ones: the candidate's ability to legal analysis, professional experience, the ability to perform the duties of a judge, language abilities, the ability to work in a team in an international environment in which several legal systems are represented and concerning impartiality, fairness and honesty of the candidate. A new stage of consultation with the judicial selection panel has shaped the trend towards democratization of this process and bringing it closer to pan-European standards.  This allowed the author to state that the process of forming the judicial office in the EU has become more transparent and fair, which serves as one of the institutional guarantees for proper legal protection in theUnion.


Author Biography

Тетяна В’ячеславівна Комарова, Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University

PhD in Law, Doctoral researcher of the International Law Department


Komarova, T. (2010). Yurisdikciya Sudu Evrpeyskogo Soyuzy: monographia. Kharkiv: Pravo [in Ukrainian].

Komarova, T. (2012). Vpliv Sudu Evrpeyskogo Soyuzy ns rozvitok prava ta institutiv ES. Istoriya evropeyskoi integracii vid Rimskoyi imperiido Evropeyskogo Soyuzu.YakovyukI.(Ed.).Kiev: Pravo Ukraini.Ch.8, 171–202 [in Ukrainian].

Komarova, T. (2010). Razvitie Sudom Evrpeyskogo Soyuza koncepcii suvereniteta gosudarstv-chlenov ES. Pravovie problemi opredeleniya i realizacii gosudarstvenogo suvereniteta na sovremennom etape. Skovikova A.,YakovyukaI.(Eds.).Moscow: “NOPKC Voshod-A”, 188–208 [in Russian].

Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2015/2422 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 amending Protocol No 3 on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union. URL:

Solanke, I.(2009). Diversity and Independencein the European Court of Justice. Columbian Journal of European Law, Vol. 15, 89–121.

Schockweiler, F. L'Independence et la Legitimatedu Judge Dans L'Ordre Juridique Communautaire. Revista Di Diritto Europea. 1993. Vol. 33. P. 671-680.

Mahoney, P. (2008). The international judiciary – Independenceand accountability. Law and Practice of International Courts and Tribunals. Vol. 7. P. 313–324;

Mackenzie, R., Malleson, K., Martin, P., Sands, P. (2010). Selecting International Judges. Principle, Process and Politics.OxfordPublishing.

Dumbrovsky, Т., Petkova, В., Van Der Sluis, М. (2014). Judicial Appointments: the Article 225 TFEU Advisory Panel and Selection Procedures in the Member States. Common Market Law Review, Vol. 51, 455–482.

Resolution CM/Res (2010 ) 26 on the establishment of an Advisory Panel of Experts on Candidates for Election as Judge to the European Court of Human Rights. URL:

Sauve, J.-M. (2013). Le Role du comite 255 dans la selection du juge l’Union. The Court of Justice and the construction of Europe: Analyses and perspectives on sixty years of case-law (Eds. Rosas A., Levits E., Bot Y.).The Hague: Asser Press.

Report of Working Party on the Future of the European Communities’ Court System. URL:

Fourth Activity Report of the Panel Provided for by Article 255 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. URL:

Case C-28/08 P, European Commission v The Bavarian Lager Company. Reports of Cases. 2010, I-06055.

Bell, J. (2006). Judiciaries withinEurope: A Comparative Review.New York:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Guarnieri, C. (2004). Appointment and Career of Judges in Continental Europe: The Rise of Judicial Self-Government. Legal Studies, Vol. 24, 169–187.

The Role and Future of European Court of Justice. (1996). A Report of the EC Advisory Board of the British Institute chaired by Rt. Hon. the Lord Slynn of Hadley.London: BritishInstituteofInternationaland Comparative Law. 166 p.

Turner, C., Munos, R. (1999–2000). Revising the Judicial Architecture of the European Union. Yearbook of European Law, 1, 1–9.



How to Cite

Комарова, Т. В. (2018). Formation of the judicial office in the EU: last tendencies. Problems of Legality, (141), 201–213.