Geir H. Haarde, then PM, asked the states lawyer in November to work on a report about a possible rulingparties in the debate of Icelanders on the one hand and Brits/Dutch on the other hand because of the Icesave matter. The report was made by University teachers Björg Thorarensen, Stefán Már Stefánsson and Víðir Már Matthíasson.

 The report says that in booking 34 in the EEA-agreement it talks of the courts of EFTA-states can ask the EU courts to rule on the interpretation of the EEA-rules which correspond with the rules of the union. The clause only applies if there is any doubt as to how to enterpret a case before a court in a EFTA-state. 

Does not apply to the dissagreent with Britain and Holland. 

'This clause does not in any way apply to the disagreement which is between Iceland on one hand and Britain/Holland on the other, as there is no case currently being run between these parties in the Icelandic justice system. Besides that it must be questioned whether it is permitted by the Icelandic constitution to invoke the clause in question.'

The EU court is said to be able to run as an arbitrator in several cases, it is mentioned in the Rome agreement. The court can handle disputes between memberstates of the EU in matters that the Rome agreement states but it can 'most probably not be used as an arbitrator between member states and a third state.'

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Name

Email

Website

Title

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.

Add Comment