Adopted text
Request for opinion from the Court of Justice on the compatibility with the Treaties of the proposed EU-Mercosur Partnership Agreement (EMPA) and Interim Trade Agreement (ITA)
TA-10-2026-0008 · P10_TA(2026)0008 · PE782.015
- Adopted in plenary on · Adopted 334–324–11 · See the decision →
- Full procedure 2026/2560
✦ In short · AI summary of this text, generated 4 Sept 2026
Written by a language model from the full text only; every figure comes from the text. The paragraph links open the paragraph a statement rests on — check the text itself before relying on it.
Parliament requests the Court of Justice to assess whether the proposed EU-Mercosur Partnership Agreement and Interim Trade Agreement comply with EU Treaties, citing concerns over their split, rebalancing mechanism, and precautionary principle.¶¶¶
Key points
- Concerned that splitting the agreement into EMPA and ITA may breach Article 218(2) and (4) TFEU, conferral, institutional balance, and sincere cooperation, affecting Council voting and national parliaments' role.¶
- Concerned the rebalancing mechanism may be incompatible with Articles 11, 168, 169, 191 TFEU and Charter Articles 35, 37, 38, threatening EU legal order autonomy.¶
- Concerned the agreements may compromise the precautionary principle, potentially conflicting with TFEU Articles 168, 169, 191 and Charter Articles 35, 37, 38, especially via arbitration panel authority.¶
- Decides to seek a Court of Justice opinion under Article 218(11) TFEU on the compatibility of the proposed agreements and the EU's conclusion procedure.¶
Who is affected
- National parliaments of EU member states, whose ratification rights may be circumvented by the split.¶¶
- EU institutions, including co-legislators and the Commission, potentially pressured by rebalancing claims.¶
- Mercosur countries (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay), which could use the rebalancing mechanism.¶¶
Legal basis: Article 218(11) TFEU¶