UNIT 1 LECTURES

Question 1

direct validity

Answer 1

automatically part of national legal order, as soon it
has been enacted, no need to transform, there can be no delay in transformation
(contrast international agreements have to be transformed, there can be delays)

Question 2

direct applicability

Answer 2

domestic courts, tribunals, administrative bodies have to
apply EU Law, and private persons can invoke rights directly

Question 3

effect of direct effect?

Answer 3

broke up the golden cage of a state of classic international
law, private persons had only rights under national law; through direct effect part
of national law, ‘millions of private attorney generals’ who can invoke EU Law,
mechanism of international legal system has been

Question 4

Supremacy of EU Law

Answer 4

if there is conflict between EU Law and national Law,
national law must be disapplied, not dissolved

Question 5

Preliminary reference procedure (short meaning)

Answer 5

: national courts obligation to ask the ECJ, how to interpret EU law

Question 6

What kind of law can the ECJ interpret in PRP?

Answer 6

ECJ only competent to interpret primary law

Question 7

What can national court ask ECj to interpret?

Answer 7

National courts are required to ask the ECJ regarding checking the validity
of secondary law: if in conformity with primary law

Question 8

Why does the PRP procedure exist?

Answer 8

Leitmotiv: uniform application of EU law throughout all member states
/integration: integration as a ‘quasi-automatic process’

Question 9

Can a national court review the legality of an EU act?

Answer 9

No

Question 10

Why fundamental rights

Answer 10

EU has public powers as well, competences of EU are even more powerful: because
of direct effect and supremacy, national human rights cannot be invoked against EU
law: therefore need for human rights

Question 11

Why not fundamental rights before?

Answer 11

ECJ originally: declines to protect human rights → first more focus on economic standards / wasnt mentioned in EEC

Question 12

Stauda case

Answer 12

yes we have non written general principles of EU law - so yes fundamental rights

Question 13

Solange I

Answer 13

the German BVerfG said, that
it would neglect the doctrine of supremacy of EC (secondary) law as long as the
scope and scale of fundamental rights protection at EC level were not comparable to the one guaranteed by the German Basic Law (Grundgesetz): this of course
endangered integration

Question 14

Solange II

Answer 14

BVerfG decided that it would no longer examine the compatibility of EC legislation
with the German Basic Law as long as (thus “solange”) the European Court continues
to protect fundamental rights adequately

Question 15

EU Charter of Fundamental Rights when?

Answer 15

2000 - after Solange II and banana decision

Question 16

Is the charter of rights EU law

Answer 16

The European Convention on Human Rights is NOT EU LAW!

Question 17

What is the relationship between the European Convention on Human Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?
*

Answer 17

Interpretation Charter Fundamental Rights must not lowering the standards of protection provided by the ECHR, see ar t 53 CFR + 6.2 CEU. They work together! CFR is EU law and the other isn’t, but CFR cant undermine ECHR

Question 18

Binding status to charter?

Answer 18

According to 51 ECHR: binding for EU member states, only if they
implement EU law

NOW = after Lisbon treaty it is hard law / primary law

Question 19

Future accession?

Answer 19

Fundamental Rights as guaranteed in the ECHR and in MS constitutional system are general principles of EU Law
(see 6(2) TEU)

Question 20

Why would the ECJ not want to accede to charter?

Answer 20

Who protects autonomy of EU law: the ECJ itself, protects its own position, ECJ
was called a selfish court

Question 21

Bosphoros

Answer 21

Similar to Solange, presumption or the presumption of equivalent protection of ECHR rights by the EU, even though the EU is not a party to the ECHR.
=> in concrete violation you can bring case to ECHR

Question 22

what would happen after accession?

Answer 22

*direct responsibility of EU => bring complaint directly to EU in strasbourg instead MS.
→ no bosphorus approach possible