«Born into the International order, the European Community law can touch people only through the juridical order of its Member State.
Therefore arises the question about the relationship between EC law and domestic law.
The EC law concerns much...» Document abstract
$7.95
8 word format
Language : english
European law
presentation
date published
05/05/2002
review : not yet assessed
level : Expert
requested 56 times
SummaryBorn into the International order, the European Community law can touch people only through the juridical order of its Member State.
Therefore arises the question about the relationship between EC law and domestic law.
The EC law concerns much more directly individuals than the international law. One of the main issues of the EC law is the invocability of EC law by the individuals in domestic courts.
Normally, EC law has to be implemented in the domestic legal order of the Member States but there arises a difficulty: individuals are bound by the implementation of its State which can be quite different from the EC law – or inexistent.
The ECJ thinks that the EC legal order has a specific relationship with the legal order of its Member State which is characterized on the one hand by the primacy of EC law (ECJ Costa v. Enel of the 15th July 1964, 6/64, R. p.1141), and on the other hand by the autonomy of EC law (ECJ Van Gend en Loos 5th February 1963, 26/62, R. p.1). The plain effect of the EC law being the consequences of the former principles and being necessary for them to really exist, the ECJ created the theory of direct effect. By this theory, the ECJ allowed the direct invocability of dispositions of EC law by individuals. Indeed, States are not always very compliant with the implementation of the EC law, thus for the EC law to have a plain effect, the States level in the implementation has to be skipped.
The first purpose of the ECJ is the efficiency of the EC law. This efficiency has been firstly concentrated on the individual's rights. But afterwards, this goal widened and incorporates other “sub-goals” such as the protection of environment and to make a more real EU for individuals through an EC law they can directly attain. But the purpose is still the efficiency of the EC law.
The theory of direct effect is a very good tool for this goal to be achieved. Indeed, direct effect means that the EC rules produced effects on individuals without any intervention of the States.
In order to have a better understanding of this theory and its consequences, we will see in a first part its origins and criteria, in a second part the application of this theory to the different acts of EC law, and finally some national reactions towards the theory of the direct effect.
Therefore arises the question about the relationship between EC law and domestic law.
The EC law concerns much more directly individuals than the international law. One of the main issues of the EC law is the invocability of EC law by the individuals in domestic courts.
Normally, EC law has to be implemented in the domestic legal order of the Member States but there arises a difficulty: individuals are bound by the implementation of its State which can be quite different from the EC law – or inexistent.
The ECJ thinks that the EC legal order has a specific relationship with the legal order of its Member State which is characterized on the one hand by the primacy of EC law (ECJ Costa v. Enel of the 15th July 1964, 6/64, R. p.1141), and on the other hand by the autonomy of EC law (ECJ Van Gend en Loos 5th February 1963, 26/62, R. p.1). The plain effect of the EC law being the consequences of the former principles and being necessary for them to really exist, the ECJ created the theory of direct effect. By this theory, the ECJ allowed the direct invocability of dispositions of EC law by individuals. Indeed, States are not always very compliant with the implementation of the EC law, thus for the EC law to have a plain effect, the States level in the implementation has to be skipped.
The first purpose of the ECJ is the efficiency of the EC law. This efficiency has been firstly concentrated on the individual's rights. But afterwards, this goal widened and incorporates other “sub-goals” such as the protection of environment and to make a more real EU for individuals through an EC law they can directly attain. But the purpose is still the efficiency of the EC law.
The theory of direct effect is a very good tool for this goal to be achieved. Indeed, direct effect means that the EC rules produced effects on individuals without any intervention of the States.
In order to have a better understanding of this theory and its consequences, we will see in a first part its origins and criteria, in a second part the application of this theory to the different acts of EC law, and finally some national reactions towards the theory of the direct effect.
Table of Contents
- Origin and criteria of the theory of direct effect
- Origin
- Criteria
- Application of the Theory to the different acts of the EC
- Application to the founding treaties
- Application to the secondary sources
- National reactions
- Italy
- United Kingdom
- France
«The Europe of 25 is a factor of chances but also of risks. The enlarged European Union will not be the same at a bigger scale. The sphere of action of the European institutions is changing and it has to be adapted to a brand new structure. The...» Document abstract
$5.95
6 word format
Language : english
European law
worksheets
date published
15/01/2006
review : not yet assessed
level : Advanced
requested 16 times
SummaryThe Europe of 25 is a factor of chances but also of risks. The enlarged European Union will not be the same at a bigger scale. The sphere of action of the European institutions is changing and it has to be adapted to a brand new structure. The socio-economic disparities between the Europe of 15 and the 10 new members require a new repartition of the European budget and new economic instruments of redistribution.
Table of Contents
- Integration of the European Union: the institutional challenge
- 25 countries: no more old certainties about the future of the European Union
‘The European Union Court of Justice is more relevant for the advance of the EU political unity than the Commission and the Parliament’ - Discuss
«Its political role has being a big issue between the main theoricians of the European Union. The place of the European Parliament and the Commission in the process toward political unity is more obvious. The Commission, as the institution who has...» Document abstract
$3.95
4 word format
Language : english
European law
presentation
date published
31/03/2006
review : not yet assessed
level : Advanced
requested 24 times
SummaryIts political role has being a big issue between the main theoricians of the European Union. The place of the European Parliament and the Commission in the process toward political unity is more obvious. The Commission, as the institution who has the power of initiative, can play a large role in every step toward the political unity, while, The European Parliament, even if it can be seen as powerless, is the institution where real political debates can take place. That is why, it is more important to concentrate on the original place of the Court in the process of political unity. We have to understand why some people think that it is more relevant for advance of the EU political unity than the others suprational institutions.
The powers of the Courts are unique. It is clearly more powerful than other international courts, as the European Court of Human Rights or the International Court of Justice, or even than most of national courts. It has had a very important position in the European integration due to the fact that the Union is built under the rule of law. Nevertheless, the EU political unity cannot be realized only by an extensive application of the treaties as the court did.
The powers of the Courts are unique. It is clearly more powerful than other international courts, as the European Court of Human Rights or the International Court of Justice, or even than most of national courts. It has had a very important position in the European integration due to the fact that the Union is built under the rule of law. Nevertheless, the EU political unity cannot be realized only by an extensive application of the treaties as the court did.
Table of Contents
- The power of the European Union Court of Justice
- Differences between the European Union Court of Justice, the Commission and the European Parlament
- The European Court of Justice as an important part of a whole political process
Les internautes ont également acheté What are the challenges facing the EU in its attempts to establish democratic institutional structures ?
«“It is time to recognise that the Union has moved from a diplomatic to a democratic process, with policies that reach deep into national societies and daily life” . This statement by the European Commission subsumes ten years of political and...» Document abstract
$6.95
7 word format
Language : english
European law
presentation
date published
31/08/2006
review : not yet assessed
level : Expert
requested 32 times
Summary“It is time to recognise that the Union has moved from a diplomatic to a democratic process, with policies that reach deep into national societies and daily life” . This statement by the European Commission subsumes ten years of political and academic on-going debate on the “democratic deficit” of the EU. The main trigger of this issue was the launch of political integration by Treaty of Maastricht. As a result, the democratisation of the Union has been at the centre of all Treaty changes in the nineteen ninentees, which accounted for the urgent need felt by both political leaders and EU bureaucrats for enhancing the legitimacy of the EU. The failure of the Constitution’s ratification process shows how crucial it remains to identify the challenges facing the EU in its attempts to establish democratic institutional structures, if the former are to be addressed. This paper will argue that these challenges are related to the undertaken shift from an elitist structure based on Nation-States to a multi-level polity including all citizens. Since these two ideas are ideal-types situated at both ends of a spectrum, the position the EU holds or should hold varies along normative lines. Institutional structures will be understood here in the (broad) constructivist sense, ie as all institutionalised processes that characterise the EU as a polity, including – next to institutions themselves – constitutionalised values, mecanisms for participation, decision-making processes, etc. Democracy will be defined as a mode of governance characterised by a set of procedures but also by substantive values , both aiming at guaranteeing the election by citizens of representatives on a pluralist basis, the respect of the rule of law, as well as the protection of the rights and freedoms of individuals and minorities. Dealing with challenges requires th consider three relevant topics: the current situation, the objectives pursued by the EU and the – both conceptual and practical – obstacles on the way. Thus, I will first examine the obstacles towards a multi-level system of governance specific to the EU. Then, I will go on the impediments to the shift from an elitist and functionally fragmented decision-making structure to a more inclusive political community.
Table of Contents
- Theorizing and achieving a model of democracy specific to the EU .
- The current picture: the blatant inadequacy of both supranational and intergovernmental models .
- The EU as a multi-level polity: conceptual and practical obstacles.
- From an elitist and functionnally fragmentated polity to an inclusive political community.
- The current picture: democratic legitimacy prevented by the ´cognitive deficit´ and the unbalanced representation of societal interests.
- The challenge: towards an enhanced citizen's involvment and a ´European social contract´?.
«In its decision of the 6th October 2004, the European Commission has assessed the compatibility with the common market of the concentration of two firms from the nuclear industry sector, following the procedure laid down in the merger regulation. ...» Document abstract
$9.95
12 word format
Language : english
European law
law case
date published
05/09/2006
review : not yet assessed
level : Advanced
requested 8 times
SummaryIn its decision of the 6th October 2004, the European Commission has assessed the compatibility with the common market of the concentration of two firms from the nuclear industry sector, following the procedure laid down in the merger regulation. This concentration was proposed by the French company, Areva (Société de participations du Commissariat à l’Energie atomique SA) and aimed at the creation of a joint venture, by a common control of ETC (Enrichment Technology Company Limited), a British undertaking which used to be wholly controlled by the British holding, Urenco Limited.
In this case, the Commission assesses the potential effects of this concentration on competition, since it raises serious doubts about the compatibility of this operation with the common market.
In order to comment this case, we will summarise the facts at stake, examine the arguments of the commission and its conclusion. We will also have a closer look at the remedies proposed before weighing the advantages and drawbacks of the Commission’s proposition.
In this case, the Commission assesses the potential effects of this concentration on competition, since it raises serious doubts about the compatibility of this operation with the common market.
In order to comment this case, we will summarise the facts at stake, examine the arguments of the commission and its conclusion. We will also have a closer look at the remedies proposed before weighing the advantages and drawbacks of the Commission’s proposition.
Table of Contents
- Summary of the facts.
- Arguments of the European Commission.
- Reasons for the decision.
- The nature of the proposed remedies.
- Advantages and disadvantages of what is proposed by the Commission.
«The European Union aims at protecting the health, safety and economic well-being of its citizens. It promotes their rights to information, helps them safeguard their interests and encourages them to set up consumer associations. Consumer policy is...» Document abstract
$9.95
19 word format
Language : english
European law
presentation
date published
16/01/2007
review : not yet assessed
level : Expert
requested 23 times
SummaryThe European Union aims at protecting the health, safety and economic well-being of its citizens. It promotes their rights to information, helps them safeguard their interests and encourages them to set up consumer associations. Consumer policy is designed to improve the quality of life of all European citizens. The Union ensures that consumer interests are built into EU legislation for all 450 million citizens to benefit from the same high level of consumer protection. Yet, legislation is not the only way. Other methods are used, such as good practice guidelines and strong consumer organisations. Each European consumer must have sufficient accurate information before purchasing and rely on clear legal rights when transactions go wrong.
EU consumer policy has been constantly evolving since the first programme for consumer information and protection was adopted in 1975. A large number of measures have been taken to safeguard consumers’ interests in areas such as fair business practices, misleading and comparative advertising, price indicators and unfair contract terms for instance. The policy has ensured consumers a large degree of safety in many areas over the years. The General Product Safety Directive was adopted in 1992, a revised version of it came into force in January 2004, introducing new and stricter rules and safety requirements for sports and playground equipment, childcare articles, textiles and furniture. Safety measures were already in place for toys, electric appliances, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals and machinery.
EU consumer policy for 2002-2006 should:
- guarantee essential health and safety standards, so that buyers are sure the products they purchase are safe and that they are protected against illegal and abusive practices by sellers;
- enable individuals to understand policies that affect them and have a say when these policies are made;
- establish a common environment across the Union so that shoppers are confident about making cross-border purchases;
- ensure that consumer concerns are taken into account in every relevant EU policy area, from environment and transport to financial services and agriculture.
EU consumer policy has been constantly evolving since the first programme for consumer information and protection was adopted in 1975. A large number of measures have been taken to safeguard consumers’ interests in areas such as fair business practices, misleading and comparative advertising, price indicators and unfair contract terms for instance. The policy has ensured consumers a large degree of safety in many areas over the years. The General Product Safety Directive was adopted in 1992, a revised version of it came into force in January 2004, introducing new and stricter rules and safety requirements for sports and playground equipment, childcare articles, textiles and furniture. Safety measures were already in place for toys, electric appliances, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals and machinery.
EU consumer policy for 2002-2006 should:
- guarantee essential health and safety standards, so that buyers are sure the products they purchase are safe and that they are protected against illegal and abusive practices by sellers;
- enable individuals to understand policies that affect them and have a say when these policies are made;
- establish a common environment across the Union so that shoppers are confident about making cross-border purchases;
- ensure that consumer concerns are taken into account in every relevant EU policy area, from environment and transport to financial services and agriculture.
Table of Contents
- The principles of the consumer protection . An overview of EU policy
- Institutional background
- Current priorities
- Financial support of EU consumer policy
- The consumer protection in practice selected examples of EU achievements
- Consumer safety
- Protection of consumer´ s economic and legal interests
- Consumer information
«The majority of legal authors divide the legal systems in the world into two mains groups : the common law on the one hand and the civil law on the other hand . The most interesting is that when you try to find definitions for those words, you often...» Document abstract
$4.95
5 word format
Language : english
European law
presentation
date published
08/03/2007
review : not yet assessed
level : Advanced
requested 1 times
SummaryThe majority of legal authors divide the legal systems in the world into two mains groups : the common law on the one hand and the civil law on the other hand . The most interesting is that when you try to find definitions for those words, you often find the basic definition and then as a conclusion you are told to distinguish the two systems. For instance, we can look at the definitions given by Britannica Encyclopedia for those two notions. Civil law is defined as « a body of law developed from Roman law and used in continental Europe and most former colonies of European nations, including the province of Quebec and the U.S. state of Louisiana… The basis of law in civil-law jurisdictions is statute, not custom; civil law is thus to be distinguished from common law » . Then, common law is defined as « a body of law based on custom and general principles and that, embodied in case law, serves as precedent or is applied to situations not covered by statute. Common law has been administered in the courts of England since the Middle Ages; it is also found in the U.S. and in most of the British Commonwealth. It is distinguished from civil law » .
Since those two systems are both used in the European Union, it might be interesting to look at their differences concretely. So, here we will focus on the main differences between civil and common law as define above. We will concentrate our discussion on the civil and common law as used on the European continent. Rather than focusing on each differences which will lead us to a descriptive listing, we will adopt an evolutive approach. Thus, we will look at the historical background of each systems and how it has influence their actuals characteristics (I). Then, we will focus on the main difference between civil and common law, that is to say the legal thinking, notwithstanding the fact that they always have the same purpose : regulate and harmonize the human activity . (II)
Since those two systems are both used in the European Union, it might be interesting to look at their differences concretely. So, here we will focus on the main differences between civil and common law as define above. We will concentrate our discussion on the civil and common law as used on the European continent. Rather than focusing on each differences which will lead us to a descriptive listing, we will adopt an evolutive approach. Thus, we will look at the historical background of each systems and how it has influence their actuals characteristics (I). Then, we will focus on the main difference between civil and common law, that is to say the legal thinking, notwithstanding the fact that they always have the same purpose : regulate and harmonize the human activity . (II)
Table of Contents
- From a différent historical Background to
- Different légal Thinking
- From a différent légal thinking to the same goal
Results page: 1
knowledge network