Listen: Could the EU court of justice kill the EU-Mercosur trade agreement?

What looked like a victory against the EU–Mercosur trade deal this week may be something else entirely.

As farmers protested outside and MEPs voted inside, the European Parliament took an unusual step: asking the EU Court of Justice to rule on the legality of the agreement. It’s a move that freezes the deal for now, but doesn’t kill it.

So what exactly did parliament vote for, what could the judges decide, and how much power does this really give lawmakers over one of the EU’s biggest trade agreements?

Production: By Europod, in co-production with Sphera Network.

EUobserver is proud to have an editorial partnership with Europod to co-publish the podcast series “Long Story Short” hosted by Léa Marchal. The podcast is available on all major platforms.

You can find the transcript here if you prefer reading:

A victory in the fight against the EU–Mercosur trade agreement.

That’s what members of the European Parliament, alongside farmers from all over Europe, celebrated on Wednesday. The parliament voted to challenge the controversial trade deal before the EU Court of Justice.

What will happen if the judges rule against the treaty?

Hi, I’m Léa Marchal, and I make sure you are briefed on the most important things happening across Europe

Opponents of the EU–Mercosur treaty — you just heard some of them protesting — hope that this first vote in the European Parliament signals a majority of MEPs against the deal.

But what the EP voted on this week was actually not a rejection of the agreement, even if it gives a signal. It is only asking the European Court of justice to rule on the legality of the treaty. 

What will happen now? The court will take on the request of the parliament and give a ruling, possibly before the end of the year.

Meanwhile, the validation of the deal by MEPs is frozen. 

What if the court cancels the agreement?

The European Commission, which is the one negotiating the agreement, would be tasked with reviewing the text. And this has already happened in the past.

The case of Western Sahara and the EU–Morocco trade agreement is a very interesting one in this sense.

In recent years, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has delivered several rulings against it.

Judges ruled that trade liberalisation should not apply to Western Sahara, a territory disputed between Morocco and the Polisario Front. because the Sahrawi population were never asked for consent.

In 2024, the ECJ cancelled the agreement in its entirety. 

As a result, the EU and Morocco worked out a quick fix to make the agreement compliant. 

The EU made a pledge to finance development projects in Western Sahara.

And since October 2025, the amended agreement has been in force and applies to Western Sahara, even though its population never explicitly consented to it.

Now, if the ECJ was to rule against the EU/Mercosur trade deal, the commission would likely find a way to make it compatible with the treaties just like in the Morocco case.

Because within the commission, many believe the economic importance of the agreement is such that it must go ahead, whatever it takes.

Trade commissioner Maroš Šefčovič considers the parliament’s vote a mistake.

He is confident that the court will issue a favourable ruling for the trade deal.

Among the provisions challenged by the parliament, one should worry the commission: it’s about a mechanism requested by Brazil which  has direct implications for future EU legislation.

Why? Because if Mercosur countries are not happy with EU  legislation in the future, they could ask to suspend the agreement. The consequence is that EU lawmakers might think twice before adopting ambitious climate or sanitary regulations.

On this, experts mandated by NGOs have argued that this  mechanism is not incompatible with EU law. 

In any case, the next step now lies with the court. 

Debates continue around the idea of applying the agreement provisionally — even before the court’s decision and the parliament’s final approval.

Maybe a topic for a future episode.

Become a subscriber and support EUobserver's journalism in 2026.