Is There a Need for International Agreements to Have Direct Effect When the Validity of EU Law is Challenged? - A Member State Perspective

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Szilárd Gáspár-Szilágyi
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Direct Effect ◽  
International Agreements ◽  
Eu Law

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

2020 ◽  
pp. 202-225
Author(s):  
Neil Parpworth
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
Direct Effect ◽  
Maastricht Treaty ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Treaty Of Amsterdam ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Direct Applicability

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, and concludes by considering the likely enduring impact of EU law even after the UK has ceased to be a member state.

7. Doctrines of European Union law: direct effect, supremacy, state liability for breach of EU law and other remedies

2021 ◽  
pp. 186-248
Author(s):  
Margot Horspool ◽  
Matthew Humphreys ◽  
Michael Wells-Greco
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Direct Effect ◽  
Indirect Effect ◽  
International Agreements ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
State Liability ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Selection Of

This chapter examines the main doctrines or principles of EU law. It is divided into three sections. It starts with a discussion on the principle of direct effect and indirect effect, with reference to regulations, directives and international agreements. It then considers the doctrine of supremacy or primacy of EU law with reference to a selection of Member States and the UK. The chapter also considers state liability for breach of EU law, and other remedies.

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

2020 ◽  
pp. 22-46
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.

Ships, sovereign immunity and the subtleties of the Brussels I regulation: Case C-641/18 LG and others v. Rina SpA, Ente Registro Italiano Navale: Ships, sovereign immunity and the subtleties of Brussels I: Rina

2021 ◽  
pp. 1023263X2110059
Author(s):  
Vincent Power
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
International Law ◽  
Red Sea ◽  
State Court ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Commercial Activity ◽  
Sovereign Immunity ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
Flag State

More than 1000 passengers on a Panamanian-registered ferry drowned in the Red Sea. Some survivors and relatives of some of the victims sued the classification and certification ship society which had surveyed the ferry. Relying on the Brussels I Regulation, the plaintiffs sued the defendants in the latter’s seat (in Italy). The defendants claimed sovereign immunity as they were acting on behalf of Panama (that is, the flag state). The CJEU ruled that, generally, Article 1(1) of the Regulation means that an action for damages, brought against private-law corporations engaged in the classification and certification of ships on behalf of, and upon delegation from, a non-EU Member State, falls within the concept of ‘civil and commercial matters’ in the Regulation. The defendants were therefore not immune. The CJEU qualified its ruling by saying that this is conditional on the activity being not exercised under ‘public powers’ (within the meaning of EU law) because then it would then be a sovereign and not a commercial activity. The CJEU thereby ruled that the customary public international law principle that foreign states have immunity from jurisdiction does not preclude an EU Member State court seised of a dispute from exercising jurisdiction under the Regulation in these circumstances.

Arbitration’s status under EU law

2012 ◽  
pp. 390-419
Author(s):  
Georgios I. Zekos
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Arbitration Process ◽  
Full Effect ◽  
The Will

The Commission is of the belief that the efficacy of arbitration agreements should be enhanced in order to give full effect to the will of the parties. According to the ECJ in the West Tankers decision, anti-suit injunctions for arbitration agreements are incompatible with the Brussels I Regulation so that they are no longer available so as to counter-attack a torpedo action brought before the courts of a Member State. Does the perplexing interference of courts in the whole arbitration process advance justice and effectiveness?

Enhanced Cooperation and European Tax Law

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caroline Heber
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
State Aid ◽  
Entire Group ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Member States ◽  
State Laws ◽  
Cooperation Mechanism ◽  
The Law

The enhanced cooperation mechanism allows at least nine Member States to introduce secondary EU law which is only binding among these Member States. From an internal market perspective, enhanced cooperation laws are unique as they lie somewhere between unilateral Member State laws and uniform EU law. The law creates harmonisation and coordination between the participating Member States, but it may introduce trade obstacles in relation to non-participating Member States. This book reveals that the enhanced cooperation mechanism allows Member States to protect their harmonised values and coordination endeavours against market efficiency. Values which may not be able to justify single Member State’s trade obstacles may outweigh pure internal market needs if an entire group of Member States finds these value worthy of protection. However, protection of the harmonised values can never go as far as shielding participating Member States from the negative effects of enhanced cooperation laws. The hybrid nature of enhanced cooperation laws—their nexus between the law of a single Member State and secondary EU law—also demands that these laws comply with state aid law. This book shows how the European state aid law provisions should be applied to enhanced cooperation laws. Furthermore, the book also develops a sophisticated approach to the limits non-participating Member States face in ensuring that their actions do not impede the implementation of enhanced cooperation between the participating Member States.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document