Kobler Field

The Kobler decision (ECJ, C-224/01, ECR 2003, I- 10239ff. ) Of 30 September 2003 the European Court of Justice (ECJ ) is an important decision in the field of European law and state tort law. It is a landmark decision in which the Court substantiated its reasoned decision by the Francovich case law on State liability under EU law for the case group of State liability for a mistake by the judiciary.

Prehistory

The Kobler decision was based on the following facts: The plaintiff Gerhard Kobler, a legal scholar, since March 1, 1986, as a full professor in Innsbruck in a public employment contract with the Austrian state. On his appointment to him the remuneration of an ordinary university professor the salary level 10 plus the normal service allowance was granted.

By letter of 28 February 1996, he applied for the special length of service increment for university professors according to § 50a of the Basic Law. He claimed that while he no fifteen- year period of service as a professor at Austrian universities, very comfortable but a corresponding period of service have to have basis of their activities at universities in other Member States of the Union. The requirement of five years' service time exclusively at Austrian universities - without regard to the period of service at universities in other Member States - face after Austria's accession to the European Union is a union legally unjustified indirect discrimination, as it is contrary to Article 39 EC ( free movement of workers ). The application was rejected because the 15 years of service were not completed exclusively at Austrian universities.

Against the plaintiff complained before the Administrative Court, which, in turn, to the ECJ the question in the way of preliminary rulings submitted if service times are taken into account in other member states as well as the time at home. Later, the Administrative Court withdrew the preliminary ruling and rejected the applicant's request. He argued from that particular increment was a loyalty bonus, which justified a departure from the provisions of Union law on the free movement of workers factual.

The plaintiff did not agree with this decision and therefore brought proceedings before the Regional Court for Civil Matters in Vienna against Austria for damages. Saw The Regional Court, other than the Administrative Court, both the substantive legal question and the question of State liability for European Union law court decisions as in need of clarification and asked the ECJ five questions for a preliminary ruling, inter alia, the question whether the liability of a Member State of Union law violations on decisions of supreme courts EXTEND.

Decision

The ECJ found that this was the case, because the existing case law ( Francovich decision), in so far seen no restrictions allowed. The type of institution is acting under EU law for the attribution of the offense of no consequence. However, the State is liable for a union unlawful decision only in the exceptional case where the court has manifestly infringed the applicable law. Here, the following criteria must be considered: the degree of clarity and precision of the rule breached, the intentional nature of the infringement, the justifiability of the mistake of law, the opinion of an EU institution, the violation of the duty of presentation.

However, it was in the present case no sufficiently serious breach of European Union law, because the violation was not to answer unequivocally and unambiguously.