A guide to the UPC and the UP - Flipbook - Page 265
still be able to make a decision since, in the case of equal votes, the vote of the presiding judge
will prevail. 11
Presiding Judge
14-06 One judge of the panel will be designated as the presiding judge, either by the Presidium or,
unless otherwise agreed by the panel, the presiding judge will be the most senior judge on
the panel. 12 The presiding judge is responsible for the management of the action after the
interim procedure closes, 13 consulting with and taking over from the judge-rapporteur. 14
The presiding judge’s role is to ensure the oral procedure is conducted in a fair, orderly and
efficient manner 15 and that the action is ready for a decision on the merits at the end of the
oral hearing. 16
14-07 As the presiding judge has control over the oral hearing it may also be concluded
that the presiding judge has the power to keep order during the hearing, should it
become necessary. This conclusion may not be acceptable according to the laws of some
Contracting Member States. For example, from a German law perspective, it is only in
exceptional cases that it is possible to derive legal authority from a provision which
stipulates competence. 17 Rather, German law differentiates between a provision which
defines competences and a provision which provides certain powers to public authorities.
Having said that, it may well be that this legal issue will be specifically looked at from the
perspective of the UPCA regardless of the respective national traditions in the Contracting
Member States.
Judge-rapporteur
14-08 The presiding judge of the panel to which the action is allocated will designate one of the
legally qualified judges of the panel, including the presiding judge, as judge-rapporteur. 18
The judge-rapporteur is responsible for case management during the written and interim
procedure 19 and, during these procedures, will make all necessary preparations for the
oral hearing. 20
Single Judge
14-09 Instead of being heard by a panel of judges, the parties may agree to have their case heard by
a single, legally qualified judge. 21 When making the request, the parties will not know which
judge will be appointed as the single judge as the presiding judge of the panel will decide on the
assignment of the case. 22 The single judge is able to carry out all the functions of the panel. 23
14-10 In certain circumstances, the parties may want a single judge, because a single judge
might be able to come to a decision more quickly as such judge will take on the role of both
judge-rapporteur and presiding judge and there will be no panel to convene for the
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
art.78(1) UPCA. For further information on the appointment of judges and their duties, see chapter 5 (The Structure
of the Court).
art.19(1) UPCA Statute and r.341(4) RoP.
r.110(3)RoP.
rr.110(3) and 331(3) RoP.
r.111(a) RoP.
r.111(b) RoP.
For the exception see “Bundesverfassungsgericht in the Osho Case: Neue Juristische Wochenzeitschrift”, 2002, p. 2629;
general: Maurer H, “Allgemeines Verwaltungsrecht”, 18th edn (Munich: C.H. Beck, 2011) § 21 para.53.
art.21(4) UPCA Statute and r.18 RoP.
r.331(1) RoP.
For the role of the judge-rapporteur see chapter 13 (Interim Procedure) paragraphs 13-02 to 13-04.
art.8(7) UPCA.
r.345(6) RoP.
art.19(4) UPCA Statute.
© Bird & Bird LLP | May 2023
A Guide to the UPC and the UP 255
