The Novel Approach of the CJEU on the Horizontal Direct Effect of the EU Principle of Non-Discrimination: (Unbridled) Expansionism of EU Law?

2011 ◽  
Vol 18 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 109-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mirjam de Mol
Keyword(s):  
Direct Effect ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Novel Approach ◽  
Horizontal Direct Effect ◽  
The Eu

scholarly journals EU citizens’ rights post Brexit: why direct effect beyond the EU is not enough

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 443-474 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stijn Smismans
Keyword(s):  
Direct Effect ◽  
Equal Protection ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Uk Government ◽  
Specific Implementation ◽  
The Eu

Brexit – EU citizens’ rights – Direct effect beyond the EU – The Withdrawal Agreement does not protect citizens properly – Copying substantive provisions of EU law and parts of the EU’s supranational features, such as direct effect, does not provide equal protection for EU citizens once a country is no longer part of the EU – UK-specific implementation measures to be set out in Withdrawal Agreement or Protocol – Guarantees also to be set out in primary legislation – UK Government intends to act to a great extent via secondary legislation – relationship between the Withdrawal Act and the Withdrawal Agreement and Implementation Bill

2. Supremacy, direct effect, indirect effect, and state liability

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Homewood
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Direct Effect ◽  
Indirect Effect ◽  
National Court ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Key Concepts ◽  
State Liability ◽  
The Eu

This chapter discusses the key concepts within the EU legal order: supremacy, direct effect, indirect effect, and state liability. The doctrine of supremacy dictates that EU law takes precedence over conflicting provisions of national law. If a provision of EU law is directly effective, it gives rise to rights upon which individuals can rely directly in the national court. If an EU measure is not directly effective, a claimant may be able to rely on it through the application of indirect effect, which requires national law to be interpreted in accordance with relevant EU law. State liability gives rise to a right to damages where an individual has suffered loss because a Member State has failed to implement a directive or has committed other breaches of EU law.

9. EU law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil Parpworth
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Direct Effect ◽  
Maastricht Treaty ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legislative Power ◽  
Treaty Of Amsterdam ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Direct Applicability ◽  
The Eu

This chapter discusses the primary and secondary laws of the European Union (EU). Treaties are the primary law of the EU. In addition to the treaties that originally established the three European Communities, a number of other treaties have subsequently been made. These include the Treaty on European Union (the Maastricht Treaty), the Treaty of Amsterdam, the Treaty of Nice, and the Lisbon Treaty, all of which have made important amendments to the foundation treaties. Article 288 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) confers legislative power on the Union’s institutions to make secondary legislation in accordance with the provisions of the Treaty. This secondary legislation may take different forms: regulations, directives, decisions, recommendations, and opinions. The chapter also discusses the concepts of direct applicability and direct effect, and the relationship between EU law and the English courts.

An Illusion of Protection and an Assumption of Responsibility: The Possibility of Swedish State Liability after Laval

2012 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 453-473
Author(s):  
Barend van Leeuwen
Keyword(s):  
Direct Effect ◽  
Trade Union ◽  
Trade Unions ◽  
The State ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Legislative Framework ◽  
State Liability ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
Careful Investigation ◽  
Horizontal Direct Effect

AbstractThis chapter will look deeper into the question of horizontal direct effect in the Viking and Laval cases by focusing on the effects of the Laval judgment. It will be submitted that the Laval case was an example of the horizontal enforcement of the vertical right to be protected by the State against interference with one’s free movement rights under EU law. The trade union acted within a legislative framework which had been established by the State and which provided protection to the trade union. The CJEU’s judgment established that this protection had been illusory, and the Swedish State assumed responsibility by amending two pieces of legislation. However, the reasoning of the CJEU did not sufficiently recognise the vertical nature of the proceedings. As a result, the Swedish Labour Court granted Francovich damages against the trade union, but these damages did not adequately compensate Laval for its losses. Therefore, the extension of horizontal direct effect to trade unions has resulted in inadequate judicial protection in this case. In future cases which present themselves as cases between two private parties the CJEU should more carefully investigate the responsibility of the State. A more careful investigation would open up the possibility of a Francovich claim against the State, if the State bore responsibility for breaches of EU law committed by private parties.

Human Rights in the EU: Rethinking the Role of the European Convention on Human Rights after Lisbon

2011 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolfgang Weiß
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Direct Effect ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Loss Of Autonomy ◽  
The Eu

Treaty of Lisbon – Fundamental Rights Charter – European Convention on Human Rights – Partial incorporation of Convention in Charter – Incorporation of Charter into EU law with Lisbon – Questions of loss of autonomy for the EU legal order – Gain in direct effect of Convention in EU member states

8. The Nature and Effect of EU Law: Direct Effect and Beyond

EU Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 217-261
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca
Keyword(s):  
Direct Effect ◽  
Indirect Effect ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Legal Effect ◽  
General Principles Of Law ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Horizontal Direct Effect ◽  
Academic Debate

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter discusses the doctrine of direct effect. In a broad sense direct effect means that provisions of binding EU law, which are sufficiently clear, precise, and unconditional to be considered justiciable, can be invoked and relied on by individuals before national courts. The legal effect of directives is complex. They have vertical but not horizontal direct effect. The ECJ has however crafted a growing number of qualifications to the proposition that directives do not have horizontal direct effect. The result is that directives can still have ‘legal effect’ on private parties in various ways through the principle of indirect effect/harmonious interpretation; incidental effect; fundamental rights; general principles of law; and where a regulation makes reference to a directive. The UK version contains a further section analysing issues concerning direct effect in relation to the UK post-Brexit.

7. The Nature and Effect of EU Law:

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca
Keyword(s):  
Direct Effect ◽  
Indirect Effect ◽  
Broad Sense ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Legal Effect ◽  
General Principles Of Law ◽  
Horizontal Direct Effect ◽  
Academic Debate

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter discusses the doctrine of direct effect. In a broad sense direct effect means that provisions of binding EU law, which are sufficiently clear, precise, and unconditional to be considered justiciable, can be invoked and relied on by individuals before national courts. The legal effect of directives is complex. They have vertical but not horizontal direct effect. The ECJ has however crafted a growing number of qualifications to the proposition that directives do not have horizontal direct effect. The result is that directives can still have ‘legal effect’ on private parties in various ways through the principle of indirect effect/harmonious interpretation; incidental effect; general principles of law; and where a regulation makes reference to a directive.

scholarly journals Farrell II and the Concept of an ‘Emanation of the State’

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 241-248
Author(s):  
Krystyna Romanivna Bakhtina
Keyword(s):  
Direct Effect ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Positive Development ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Horizontal Direct Effect ◽  
The Eu

Summary The Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) has established that directives cannot produce horizontal direct effect and thus may only be invoked against the State or its emanations. In the recent Farrell 2 judgement, the Court has clarified the concept of an ‘emanation of the State’ which is crucial for the purposes of applying vertical direct effect. The aim of this paper is to analyse the concept of an ‘emanation of the State’ presented in Farrell 2 ruling. Further, the article highlights that the judgement is a positive development as it brings consistency to the EU case law and corresponds to the present realities when new ‘emanations’ are emerging with the special powers attributed by the State.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document