The case of Francovich had a significant impact on the European Union (EU) law. If a conflict arises between the EU law and the national law, the EU law highly prevails. The European Union law is a framework of treaties and legislation, which have a direct or indirect effect on the laws of the member states which are bound to the European Union. Primary and Secondary laws are the two sources of the EU law. This essay will firstly analyse the main institutions of the European Union and define various legal terms. It will then move on, to discuss the case of Francovich and the importance it had for state liability. Furthermore, it will refer to subsequent cases which are linked with state liability and had an impact on the EU Law. Lastly, my own views about State Liability will be presented.
The principle of Supremacy of EU Law was established by the European Court of Justice in a series of cases. This principle authorizes EU Law to take precedence over
…show more content…
For this reason, the Commission is referred as the “guardian of the Treaties” or “watchdog” of the EU. Moreover, the decisions made by the Parliament and the Council must be made on the basis of the proposals given by the Commission.
Lastly, the Court of Justice of The European Union (ECJ) is formed by the Court of Justice, Specialised Courts and the General Court, each of the courts have their own jurisdiction and legal personnel. Their main role is to make sure that Public law is imposed, to defend individual rights and give preliminary rulings as mentioned above.
Furthermore, the EU generates its power by the Primary sources which are the Treaties and the Secondary sources which include Recommendations & Opinions, Decisions, Regulations and
on this new legal order. The new legal order of the EU is not only
Although there were numerous movements in promoting the unity of the European, but it seems to have failed. Robertson indicates the unity principle’s outcome is less than what is desired. Thereby, as Murat notes, the court will invariably grant a leeway to the state in deciding the cases namely, the ‘Margin of appreciation’. This maxim owes it genesis from a French term ‘marge d’ appreciation’ that deemed as a doctrine which gives way to a state’s discretion in their governance.
...ifferent story of the EU that has not been focused on in other books or papers. This original, unbiased approach allows the reader to put the EU in a historical perspective that also helps understanding at least the changing forces. In addition, it seems that the author wants to make the public or his audience comfortable with the idea of uncertainty that has been affecting the EU. His second part shows how the current shape was not only the result of political or economic reasons, but also a response of a changing external environment. Moreover, the idea of purgatory as well as the philosophical references and analogies gives the book an exciting, unique demission that links politics, history, and philosophy. However, it would be interesting if the author has included technical analysis and incorporated political science theories to draw policy recommendations.
This is a provision of the EU treaties, which regulates states and does not confer rights upon individuals. As such, it cannot be invoked in a complaint such as the one at hand, regarding the activation of article 50.
The European Union (EU) is fundamentally democratic and is evident through its institutions, however, the current democratic electoral structure is of great concern. The EU is a new type of political system, often referred to as a sui generis, implying its uniqueness as there exists and a non comparable political body. The EU can neither regarded as a ‘state’ nor as an ‘international institution’ as it combines supranational as well as intergovernmental characteristics (Hix, 1999, p7). In this regard it has developed its own understandings of what democracy is. It is evident that the development of and spread of democracy is a central concept and foundation to all politics within the EU, and remains focuses on makings its governing institutions “more transparent and democracy”. The recent Eurozone crisis, it’s associated anti-crisis measures and the recent enlargement of EU have however re-invigorated debate about the EUs democratic legitimacy. At the heart of the debate are discussions not about whether the EU is an all-encompassing democratic institution but rather what are ‘democratic deficits’ or the democratic shortcomings that exist within this powerful economic and political union. Underpinning these divisions as Schmitter argues, are different understandings of what democracy is in the modern context and more specifically in the unique context of the EU. This essay will argue that the EU presents a unique type of political system that is fundamentally democratic, however, there are democratic shortcomings within its procedural and institutional structure.
European Union has adapted the Charter of Fundamental Rights at Strasbourg in 2007. Their intension was to make existing human rights more visible, instead of creating new ones. The Charter is not incorporated in the Treaty of Lisbon, but under the Article 51 TEU, it has ‘the same legal value as the Treaties’. Despite Article 6 TEU and Article 51 of the Charter, some EU states, like the UK and Poland were concern about the ability of ECJ to change their national law. Therefore, the UK and Poland secured the adoption of a special protocol where Charter does not apply fully in both states.
One of the original European institutions is the Commission. Though it was one of the originals, the institution has tremendously changed from what it used to be when the European integration first began. The Commission is a supranational body responsible for legislation proposals and policy implementation. It continues to work toward a more democratic European Union every day with the new legislations and laws that it passes. In this paper I will establish why I believe the EU Commission to be a supranational body, it’s relevance to the European Union and some of the strengths and weaknesses of the institution for the citizens of the European Union.
The EU is a union of sovereign European states who share sovereignty based on treaty. The union also possesses competences in policy sectors with exclusive jurisdiction in the area of Economic and Monetary Union while others are shared with Member States (MS), the other powers belong to MS as derived from the conferral of powers art 5(2) TEU, 2(1) TFEU art.3 & 4 TFEU additionally other powers have been offered by the decisions of the European Court for direct effect on citizens
A key result of the principle of parliamentary sovereignty is that there is no hierarchy in regards to Acts of Parliament: all parliamentary legislation is, in principle, of equal validity and effectiveness. Yet, the judgement of Thoburn in 2002 indicated that there may be a special class of "constitutional statutes" such as the Human Rights Act 1998. This special class infers that parliamentary sovereignty has been eroded as despite the supposed equal validity of Acts, there are those which preside over them which in this case is EU
In this chapter I intend to elaborate over the competence of the states in matters of nationality. I will begin by explaining the relationship between both concepts, nationality being the only way to acquire citizenship of the Union. Later, I intend to explain both the sources and what they state in order to then follow through in the next chapter on how I believe the CJEU, in its rulings, contradicts what is stated in the treaties.
‘EU policies and EU legislation need to be based on objective, reliable and comparable date on the respect of fundamental rights in the EU.’ After enforcing the Charter of Fundamental rights as primary law, the national courts have been using the Charter frequently on different cases. The Charter had a great impact upon the nationals Court’s decision on protecting social rights related to employment and labour law. This essay will focus on the development of the Charter within the EU law through different cases. The first part of the essay will be based on a historical background, to give a better understanding of the social rights and the development and evolution of those rights throughout the years. The second part of the essay will discuss the EU Treaties and their approach towards the protection of the social rights. The third part of the essay will focus on the implementation of the EU Charter as a legal binding document to all Member States and the opt-outs from the Charter. This essay will conclude on the influence that the EU Charter has on the Courts decisions, in order to evaluate the impact that has on social rights within the EU.
The enlargement of the European Union (EU) in 2004 and 2007 has been termed as the largest single expansion of the EU with a total of 12 new member states – bringing the number of members to 27 – and more than 77 million citizens joining the Commission (Murphy 2006, Neueder 2003, Ross 2011). A majority of the new member states in this enlargement are from the eastern part of the continent and were countries that had just emerged from communist economies (EC 2009, Ross 2011), although overall, the enlargement also saw new member states from very different economic, social and political compared to that of the old member states (EC 2009, Ross 2011). This enlargement was also a historical significance in European history, for it saw the reunification of Europe since the Cold War in a world of increasing globalization (EC 2009, Mulle et al. 2013, Ross 2011). For that, overall, this enlargement is considered by many to have been a great success for the EU and its citizens but it is not without its problems and challenges (EC 2009, Mulle et al. 2013, Ross 2011). This essay will thus examine the impact of the 2004/2007 enlargements from two perspectives: firstly, the impact of the enlargements on the EU as a whole, and thereafter, how the enlargements have affected the new member states that were acceded during the 2004/2007 periods. Included in the essay will be the extent of their integration into the EU and how being a part of the Commission has contributed to their development as nation states. Following that, this essay will then evaluate the overall success of the enlargement process and whether the EU or the new member states have both benefited from the accessions or whether the enlargement has only proven advantageous to one th...
Van Gend en Loos v Nederlandse Administratie deer Belastingen (1963) Case 26/62 was a milestone instance of the European court of equity which built up that procurements of the 'Arrangement Establishing the European Economic Community' were fit for making lawful rights which could be upheld by both regular and lawful persons before the courts of the Community's part expresses This is presently called the guideline of direct impact. The case is recognized similar to a standout amongst the most critical, and conceivably the most celebrated advancement of European Union Law.
The story of Europe is a story that is worth telling for the simple fact that without the background of Europe, people will not understand the complexities in the creation of the Europe of yesterday and creation of the Europe today. This rich history cannot be ignored because of the close ties to the creation of the nations and the supranational institutions that have become the European Union and its trade partners. Without the background on the history of Europe the creation of this larger organization or supranational organization would be nearly impossible to understand the complexities of the current political, social and economic qualities within the EU. The history of a country, state or organization also helps us to understand the some aspects of the future of the EU.
Weiler, Joseph H.H.: «Community, Member States and European Integration: Is the Law Relevant?», Journal of Common Market Studies 21 (1982), pp. 39-56.