Commission v. Hungary
C-66/18
PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW: ALTERNATIVE SEMINAR
ZDENĚK NOVÝ

The central issue
uDoes the Hungarian statute on higher education comply with its WTO (i.e. international-law)
obligations?
uBut: where is the infringement of EU law?
2

Context
uArt. 258 TFEU – the infringement procedure
uSubjects involved:
uCommission
uCJEU
uMember state (s)
3

An argument by Hungary
uCJEU lacks jurisdiction over MS’ compliance with its obligations arising from WTO treaties
4

International treaties concluded by EU are a source of EU law
uInternational law
uEU law
5

What is the relationship between domestic law and international law in the eyes of CJEU?
uCJEU (Commission) as a supervisory mechanism against breaches of WTO (GATS) obligations (?)
u
6

Key references to international law
u
uObservance of international treaties (pacta sunt servanda) – VCLT (para 92)
uState responsibility under international law – DARSIWA embodying customary international law:
uThe relationship between domestic and international law:
uCharacterization (para 88)
uNon-invocation (para 90)
7

The result
uHungary has breached EU law by discrimination of higher education institutions from third states
in establishing in this country uStrictly speaking, Hungary has violated no provision of law
adopted by the EU itself, but rather an international treaty the latter has entered into (an
internat enforcement of international treaty within the EU)
8

An interesting argument
u“Consequently, that characterisation cannot be affected by any characterisation of the same act
that might be made under EU law.” (Judgment, para 88)
9

uThank you.
10