Revista da EMERJ - V. 21 - N. 3 - Setembro/Dezembro - 2019 - Tomo 1

 R. EMERJ, Rio de Janeiro, v. 21, n. 3, t. 1, p. 72-86, set.-dez., 2019  76 TOMO 1 can enumerate a number of institutions that create or propagate indicators. Most influential are the data about the performance of judicial systems that are produced – within wider comparisons including rankings on the attractiveness of different legal systems for doing business – by the Doing Business Project (World Bank Group). 9 This project found fertile ground not only in developing countries, but also in Europe, where the “sound operation” of the internal market, i.e. a policy relating to the economic growth, represented the public policy goal that led to the adoption of rules of judicial jurisdiction intended to be both highly predictable and to simplify the enforcement of judgments in the Member States. 10 In light of the success of the Doing Business annual reports, it is not difficult to explain the emergence of detailed evaluation report on European judicial systems, published every second year since 2006 by the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ) 11 . This biennial report aims to measure and compare the efficiency and effectiveness of European judicial systems. It has been used since 2013 as a database to create a simplified and more appealing information tool, which aims to shed light on the quality, independence and efficiency of justice systems as co-determinants of economic growth in the Member States of the European Union 12 Finally, in 2013 a cross-country inquiry into the performance of judicial system with a wealth of measurements and quantitative data was carried out under the auspices of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 13 9 www.doingbusiness.com , (zuletzt abgerufen 22.9.2017). 10 ECJ 10 February 1994 – Case C-398/92 (Mund & Fester) [1994] ECR I-474 is a landmark decision on the link between the Brussels Convention and European integration. The Maastricht Treaty placed judicial cooperation within the competence of the Justice and Home Affairs Pillar of the European Union (the so-called third pillar). The Amsterdam Treaty amended Art. 65 of the EC Treaty to give the Community competence for “improving and simplifying […] the recognition and enforcement of decisions in civil and commercial cases, including decisions in extrajudicial cases”. On that basis, the Brussels Convention was replaced by Council Regulation EC 44/2001 and the underlying public policy concerns have been widened towards the objective of maintaining and developing an area of freedom, security and justice, where the free movement of persons is ensured. Under the Lisbon Treaty, this subject matter is governed by Arts. 67 and 81 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). 11 The CEPEJ was established in 2002 within the Council of Europe. www.coe.int, (zuletzt abgerufen 22.09.2017); the fifth report was published in 2014, Uzelac , Efficiency of European Justice Systems: The Strength and Weaknesses of the CEPEJ Evaluations, in International Journal of Procedural Law, 1 (2011), 106. 12 The tool referred to is the EU Justice Scoreboard published since 2013 by the EU Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/ justice/effective-justice/files/justice_scoreboard_2014_en.pdf, (zuletzt abgerufen 22.09.2017). 13 Palumbo/Giupponi/Nunziata/Mora-Sanguinetti , Judicial Performance and its Determinants: a Cross-Country Perspective, http://www.oecd.org , (zuletzt abgerufen 22.09.2017).