Direct Effect And Eu Supremacy Flashcards
Direct Effect
The principle that eu law may be applied by citizens against its state, this is vertical direct effect, horizontal direct effect is when two private citizens apply eu law to each other,
Eu Supremacy
the principle that eu community law has president over the existing laws of nations, and courts are obliged to disregard national law when met conflicts with eu law,
based on the idea that the EU was something greater than a usual treaty due to the common market and its goals.
Van Gend en Loos
It established that European treaty law has direct effect against Member States, meaning that they are directly bound by its provisions,
The dutch violated article 12 of the EEC, by increasing the custom duties insidiously,
Everyone is now a enforcer of European law, this makes sure that effective supervision is assured beyond merely the commission
Reyners v Belgium
The Reyners case shows the Court employing direct effect to compensate for insufficient action on the part of the EU legislative institutions. In relation to discrimination, though the articles of the European Union.
Stato v Simmenthal
It’s irrelevant whether the law was passed before or after the EU law, the EU law still takes legal precedent over it to enforce individuals EU rights, even when such enforcement violates national law, moreover they ordered courts to utilise “disapplication,” granting judicial review to all national courts, a principle which overturned parliamentary sovereignty by giving the courts the obligation to “overturn,” existing parliamentary principles which conflicted with community law.
In this they repeat the principle of direct effect established in van gen de looms and the principle of Eu supremacy established in Costa v. Engel
The trigger model
supremacy is nothing more than a tool utilised by the state in order to apply direct effect in resolution to the disputes in loving community law and therefore supremacy doesn’t apply unilaterally, so some legal authority’s such as frameworks coming from the EU don’t have supremacy over national law as they lack direct effect
Minister for Justice and Equality v. Daniel Adam Popławski
it was asked if a state had the right to refuse to excise the eu framework related to the extraditing of criminals, the courts concluded that since frameworks didn’t have direct effect they didn’t overwrite national law, however due to the principle of indirect effect the states had to have national laws that abided by the framework.
Indirect effect
the national courts are required to interpret their national laws in ways which align with the provisions of eu law where direct effect doesn’t itself apply, due to it being applied against a private entity or failing to meet the other requirements for direct effect to be applied.
Flaminio Costa v E.N.E.L
Established the principle of supremacy as the EU stated they had the authority to rule upon matters of Italy, even if the Eu law was outdated when compared to the Italian law, disagreeing with the Italian courts who attempted to utilise implied appeal to state the newer Italian law was greater not putting any greater legal status upon European law.
The European court of justice however decreed they did have such power, and that the powers of the Eu limit the sovereignty of the member states
What are the conditions for direct effect?
Intended to confer rights upon individuals
Clear and precise
Unconditional
(Does not necessitate further measures of implementation.)
In modern times it’s primarily a matter of justiciability; is the norm sufficiently operational in itself to be applied by court in a particular case
Defrenne v Sabena
Sabena asks female employees to retire at 40, unlike her male counterparts,
Elaine, a Belgian lawyer argues under 157 TFEU : ‘each member state shall ensure that principle of equal pay for male and females for equal work or work of equal value is applied.
The courts interpreted it based on spirt, it has two primary aims,
No competitive advantage
Social progress
In other words the Eu law is a system based on equality, no countries should treat people differently
Pay discrimination has to go as soon as possible,
“In such situations, at least, article 119 is directly applicable and may thus give rise to individual rights the courts must protect.”
Remember that Eu law is interpreted off of spirt
Viking
Freedom of establishment vs workers rights to strike
The abolition, as between member states, of obstacles to freedom of movement for persons and freedom to provide services would be compromised if the abolition of state barriers could be neutralised by organisations and individuals not governed by public law.
Since working conditions between the states are governed by provisions of law or regulation and sometimes by collective agreement. Limiting application of the prohibitions laid down by these articles to acts of a public organisation would risk creating inequality in it application.
Therefore they ruled that freedom of establishment has direct effect and can be applied against private individuals
Egenberger
A woman was refused from working in the church for a office reporting role, to do a piece of research on non-discrimination, so the question is whether article 21 of the charter which speaks on non-discrimination, the courts recognised that the charter has direct effect, this is because the court believed that the principle of non-discrimination was fundamental to the operation of the Union
Van Duyn v Home Office
Another discrimination case, the details are irrelevant, but what’s important is that the Eu recognised the DE of Directives
Conditions for DE of Directives
General conditions apply
- clear and precise
- Unconditional
Specific conditions for directives (following from estoppel -> a MS cannot benefit from its wrong doing.)
Time for implementation has passed
But: interim duty of MS (sometimes)
Directives is not pleaded against a individual case ( not horizontal)
In other words a Directive is only applicable to a member state when the time for implementation has passed. It cannot be used vertically either
