Madrid: Every year the European Commission takes the temperature of the Union’s courtrooms, and every year the readings vary sharply from one member state to the next. The 2026 edition of the EU Justice Scoreboard, the Commission’s annual comparison of how national justice systems perform, once again lays those differences bare, charting how long cases take, how digital the courts have become, and how far citizens trust the independence of the judges who rule over them.
The Scoreboard is not a piece of binding law. It is a diagnostic, a dashboard of indicators that lets governments, investors and the Commission itself see which systems resolve disputes swiftly and which leave litigants waiting years for a first-instance judgment. Its value lies in comparison. By placing the twenty-seven side by side on the time it takes to clear civil, commercial and administrative cases, on the resources devoted to courts, and on the uptake of digital tools, it turns an abstract complaint about slow justice into figures that are hard to ignore.
The efficiency picture remains stubbornly uneven. In the best-performing systems, routine civil and commercial disputes are resolved in a matter of months; in the laggards, the same cases can drag on for years, tying up businesses and eroding the confidence of anyone who might need to enforce a contract. Digitalisation is one of the clearer bright spots, with more courts offering electronic filing, remote hearings and online access to rulings, yet here too the spread between the front-runners and the stragglers is wide, and progress in one country does little to help a claimant stuck in another.
Perceived independence is the indicator that draws the sharpest political attention. The Scoreboard tracks how citizens and companies rate the independence of their courts, and the results feed directly into the Commission’s wider Rule of Law Report, which this year again carries a single-market dimension. The link is deliberate. A judiciary that litigants do not trust to decide free of political or economic pressure is not merely a domestic concern; it deters cross-border investment and undermines the mutual recognition of judgments on which the single market depends. Where trust sags, the whole edifice of European legal cooperation feels the strain.
That is why the exercise matters beyond the statistics. Effective, independent courts are, in the Commission’s framing, a competitiveness issue as much as a rights issue. Companies weighing where to invest look at whether they can enforce a contract or defend a patent without waiting half a decade, and the Scoreboard gives them a basis for that judgment. It also arms the Commission with evidence when it presses governments to reform, and hands national ministries a mirror in which their own performance is measured against peers.
The findings will now flow into the 2026 Rule of Law Report, the more pointed document in which the Commission assesses each member state and, where necessary, issues recommendations. The Scoreboard supplies the numbers; the Rule of Law Report supplies the pressure. Together they form the Union’s main peace-time instrument for nudging national justice systems toward faster, more trusted and more independent courts, without the blunt force of infringement action, at least for now.




