Access to Written Submissions in Preliminary Reference Proceedings: An Evaluation of the CJEU Statute Reform and its Contribution to Open Justice

The article analyses the new provisions of the Statute of the Court of Justice and its Rules of Procedure requiring the proactive publication, on the Court’s website, of written observations submitted in preliminary reference proceedings by the parties and other interested persons. This development represents a significant step forward for the Court of Justice, which has historically prioritised confidentiality to protect the serenity of proceedings and the equality of arms between parties. Against this backdrop, the Article delves into this aspect of the reform through the theoretical foundations of open justice alongside the evolution of the rules and case-law on The Article was drafted in the framework of the Jean Monet Chair ‘Civic Engagement, Rights and Remedies in EU Law’, funded by the European Union and held by Prof. Stefano Montaldo (2023-2026 – edo.unito.it). Views and opinions expressed are, however, those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Education and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA). Neither the European Union nor EACEA can be held responsible for them.The Article is the outcome of the Authors’ joint research and reflections. The introduction and the concluding remarks (Sections 1 and 7, respectively) were written jointly. Ilaria Fevola authored Sections 2 and 3; Stefano Montaldo wrote Sections 4, 5 and 6. access to court documents. It also explores the implications of the reform, with particular attention to the possibility for the parties and interested persons to object to publication. To that end, the Article includes an empirical analysis of the number of objections and published observations during the first six months of the new regime’s implementation. A combined reading of the normative and empirical findings suggests that the widespread concerns over an extensive use of objections appear (for now) to be unfounded, and that a real paradigm shift towards greater openness at the Court of Justice may indeed be underway.