The procedure for a preliminary ruling is central in the ‘complete system of remedies’ offered by the Union to its citizens. Since Article 263 TFEU grants only a very reduced standing to ‘non-privileged applicants’, Article 267 TFEU became the main gate for individuals to bring their claims against the EU before the European Court of Justice. Yet, claims for breaches of fundamental rights by the Union are not at all common in the procedure for a preliminary ruling. This chapter investigates the (real) use and (realistic) potential of Article 267 TFEU as a means for the protection of fundamental rights against breaches by the EU institutions. The chapter maps all instances in which individuals used the procedure for a preliminary ruling to bring a claim against the Union for breaches of their fundamental rights since the coming into force of the Treaty of Lisbon. Using this mapping exercise, the chapter identifies how individuals raise this type of claims in the procedure, discusses the accessibility of the procedure for individual applicants, and assesses the shortcomings of the procedure as a means to redress breaches of fundamental rights by the Union. It argues that these shortcomings have to do with the structure and design of the procedure itself.

It is not possible under Article 34 ECHR to lodge individual applications at the Court to complain about an interference with one’s Convention rights caused by non-State actors. Nevertheless, the Court has found various ways to extend the protection offered by the Convention rights to horizontal relations.

This chapter focuses on the scope of protection of the Convention in vertical and horizontal relations. First, the direct Convention responsibilities of the States in horizontal relations are explained. The point at which an organisation or institution can be regarded as a ‘public authority’ to be held directly accountable for respecting the Convention is discussed and it is explained that public authorities are always obliged to act in accordance with the Convention, even if they behave as private parties. Subsequently, it is set out how the Convention may have indirect horizontal effect. Attention is thereby paid in particular to the positive obligations of the State to provide effective regulation and enforcement in such horizontal relationships, as well as to the obligations for national courts to take the Convention rights into account when deciding on private law matters.