Westminster Talks is proud to continue the series with a talk by Adam Lazowski from Westminster Law School.
In a series of very controversial judgments the Court of Justice, in a rather inventive fashion, interpreted EU legislation on the rights of air passengers in case of delays and flight cancellations.
In all certainty, it is neither the first nor the last time that the judges in Luxembourg employed the teleological method of interpretation to a legal act of the Union. This time, arguably, the Court of Justice did so in order to win both the hearts and minds of EU citizens who - more than ever before - travel by air within and outside of the European Union. By the same token, the judges in Luxembourg failed to win the hearts and minds of airlines, for which the interpretation provided by the Court translates into additional expenditure and nuisance at the times of economic crisis, fierce competition and pursuit of efficiencies in the overcrowded skies.
Arguably, in these judgments the Court once again acted as if it wished to say: consilium habemus et agere debemus. We have a plan to develop the European demos, and we are implementing it. At the same time, however, the Court gambled with its own legitimacy and gave powerful arguments to those who claim that the role of judges is to interpret law, not to be law-makers.