Court Statistics for 2009

The Court of Justice has presented its statistics for 2009.

It claims that it has it has completed in 2009 one of the highest numbers of cases in its history: 543 cases as compared to 495 in 2008. That is quite a gain in productivity. The number of new cases lodged with it remains high (561 in 2009, as compared to 592 in 2008) as to be expected given the ever increasing amount of legislation that is in force. The good thing is that the duration of proceedings in appeals has gone down (15.4 months in 2009, 18.4 months in 2008) while the duration of cases in other types of procedure is more or less the same as in 2008. Interestingly, the number of cases delivered without an Advocate General's opinion has increased (52% in 2009, 41% in 2008).

The General Court does not seem to be doing quite so well. The duration of actions in areas other than intellectual property has actually increased from 26 months in 2008 to 33.1 months in 2009. There is a very slight decrease in the duration of proceedings in intellectual property cases because of Article 135a of the Rules of Procedure that provides that the hearing may be dispensed with in certain cases. The number of new cases remains high (568 in 2009) and the stock of pending cases is still enormous (1191 cases). So, a problem there.

Finally, the Civil Service Tribunal has improved its productivity, completing 155 cases in 2009 while only 113 new cases were brought. The duration of proceedings has gone down from 17 months in 2008 to 15.1 months in 2009.

For our post on the 2008 statistics, go here.

Comments

[Bartolus]

A case can be "completed" or "ended" by something other than a "judgment". For example, if the case is a preliminary reference and relatively easy, the ECJ can answer with an "order". The procedure is a bit simpler and quicker but the practical result is the same.
Cases "completed" probably include actions which are withdrawn and finished with an order stating the case is discontinued (but not sure about that, would need to check).
For statistical purposes and your graph, it is probably best to start with judgments and add manually the orders which are substantive ones (not just procedural things like joinders or interim such as orders in interim measures).