The European Union’s two highest courts are facing a ‘crisis’ in managing their existing and ever increasing workloads, according to House of Lords report published yesterday.

The report predicted ‘another crisis of workload soon’ for the Court of Justice (CJ), the supreme or constitutional court of the EU.

The ‘prognosis’ for the General Court (GC) is ‘even bleaker’, the report added.

The report urged the CJ to review its procedures and adopt the ‘comparatively straightforward reform’ of increasing the number of Advocate Generals (AG) working there ‘as soon as possible’.

The ‘best and most flexible long-term solution’ for the GC, the report suggested, would be to increase its judiciary by one third.

‘This reform will of course cost money,’ the report said, ‘but given the central role fulfilled by the GC in the effective operation of the EU, we believe that the benefits would clearly outweigh the costs.’

The report added that ‘structural solutions’ also need to be found.

The report followed the Lords’ EU Committee’s examination of the workload of the courts that make up the EU’s judicial arm.

The role of the CJ, formerly the European Court of Justice, is to examine the legality of EU acts and ensure the law is interpreted and applied uniformly.

AGs support the work of the CJ’s judges by producing written opinions setting out their understanding of the applicable law, and recommending how cases ought to be decided.

Their opinion is not binding, but the courts usually follow their advice.

The General Court (GC) is ranked beneath the CJ and deals with most cases against the institutions and agencies of the EU.

The report said the GC has been criticised twice, most recently two years ago, for taking too long to deliver justice, with the Confederation of British Industry claiming it took an average of 33.1 months to rule on competition cases.

The report gave the example of a large competition case appearing before the GC where ‘five, seven or 10 applicants’ may be challenging a 600-page decision of the European Commission, ‘and the file may consist of 20,000 pages’.

The Lords’ committee also examined the workload of the EU’s third court, the Civil Service Tribunal, which deals with disputes between EU institutions and their employees.

This court is a ‘success story and the Committee has no concerns regarding its ability to manage its caseload,’ the report said.

More information about the House of Lords European Union Committee, including evidence given to the enquiry can be found on theparliamentary website .