Overview Flashcards
Van Gend en Loos [1963]
In this early judgment, the Court of Justice established the important principle that Community, now Union, law confers rights to individuals, as well as creating new legal obligations. We will see this in more detail in future lectures.
Costa v ENEL [1964]
‘ … the law stemming from the Treaty, an independent source of law, could not, because of its special and original nature, be overridden by domestic legal provisions, however framed, without being deprived of its character as Community law and without the legal basis of the Community being called into question.’
Fratelli Variola [1973]
owing to their very nature and their place in the system of sources of [EU] law, regulations operate to confer rights on individuals which the national courts have a duty to protect.
Muñoz
compliance of certain provisions in regulations must be capable of enforcement in civil proceedings instituted by a trader against a competitor. One person complying with EU rules and one was not, the good trader took action and won.
Commission v France (Air Pollution Directive) [2002]
EU legislative practice shows that there may be great differences in the types of obligations which directives impose on the Member States and therefore in the results which must be achieved. Air pollution directive, limited amount of pollinations produced from incinerators. France adopted national legislation which limited the amount of emissions produced from incinerators. However, in practise, it produced too much emissions. Even though law had been implemented, they failed to comply with the law. CoJ Held: obligation derived from directive is the result, the result is not to just put the legislation in place, it is to actually put it in practise.
Von Colson and Kamann [1984]
the extent of the result obligation – effective protection of the rights conferred on individuals. Brought action for unlawful. They claimed sexual discrimination, the German courts found that there had been sex discrimination. However, when it came to the remedy, they followed national law, which was travel money. The directive, however, did refer to Member States adopting measures that judicial procedures give a right to individuals. The national court asked if this remedy was just, they said no. Held: these laws are to protect the females against discrimination, just to find the facts is not enough, the remedy should be effective and take into account the fault and deter.
