Private parties and the revised standing criteria under article 263 TFEU: dawn of effective judicial protection or a false one?

This thesis examines the effect of the Lisbon Treaty reform of the locus standi criteria in Article 263(4) TFEU on the EU judicial review system and its compliance with the right of private parties to effective judicial protection. The force of the criticism against the EU judicial review system focused upon the restrictive interpretation of the standing criterion of individual concern and the insufficiency of the preliminary reference route of challenging acts of the EU, advocating that only a direct action for annulment ensures respect of the right to effective judicial protection. The Lisbon Treaty relaxed the locus standi criteria for regulatory acts not entailing implementing measures. The interpretation of the notion of a “regulatory act” by the CJEU was rather unsurprising. However, the notion of “implementing measures” was given a very restrictive interpretation by the CJEU, despite early expectations and a forceful Opinion by AG Cruz Villalon. This thesis records some contemporary realities related to the judicial review system and considers issues of judicial policy choice, the academic reception and the possible justifications of the locus standi rules as developed by the CJEU, questioning the interpretative choices of the CJEU. The effects of the reform are further examined by a review of a sample of the pre-Lisbon Case-Law under the post-Lisbon rules and a quantitative study of a sample of post-Lisbon EU measures. Both offer comparisons of the results reached under the interpretation of the notion of implementing measures adopted by the CJEU with the results that could have been reached under the interpretation proposed by AG Cruz Villalon. This thesis argues that the Lisbon Treaty reform offered a great opportunity for significant improvement in judicial protection. One that the CJEU regrettably missed.