• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
Page
  1. 1
    1
  2. 2
    2
  3. 3
    3
  4. 4
    4
  5. 5
    5
  6. 6
    6
  7. 7
    7
  8. 8
    8

Critically analyse the development of he doctrine by the ECJ, and consider the extent to which this doctrine has been received by the UK as a cornerstone of the new legal order.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

"The doctrine of supremacy of community law has been one of the notable achievements of the ECJ. It has been a corner stone in the building of a Community legal order." Critically analyse the development of he doctrine by the ECJ, and consider the extent to which this doctrine has been received by the UK as a cornerstone of the new legal order. EC law automatically forms part of our own National Law and has done since the European Communities Act of 1972. The EU functions through four main bodies; The Council (of Ministers), The Commission, The European Parliament and most importantly The European Court of Justice (ECJ), which primarily deals with matters of EC law, referred to it by the courts of member states. The ECJ is the ultimate arbiter and enforcer of EC law, as set out in article 1641 of the Treaty of Rome. There are two aspects of the courts jurisdiction, which have been particularly significant in the development of UK national law. The first is the power of the European commission to bring proceedings against a member state for failing to fulfil its community law obligations. The second is the power of national courts to refer a point of community law, which arises in domestic proceedings for a preliminary ruling. Here the courts use the principle of direct effect, which allows individuals to rely upon Community law rights before national courts. There have also been instances where the British courts have applied the principle of indirect effect, where member states are required to construe national law to comply with Community obligations. The Development of the ECJ principles has been progressive in its principles, although certain strands have emerged over time, such as, respect for fundamental rights (i.e. indirectly the ECHR) principles of proportionality, of equality, respect for procedural rights, etc. two main points however have dramatically shaped the EU and its member states. ...read more.

Middle

The doctrine of supremacy of parliament, entrenched in the English legal system for hundreds of years was not to be so easier removed as that of the Italian constitution. However the European Communities Act 1972, with particularly reference to s2 (1) of the ECA 197214 and s2 (4)15, gave legal effect within the UK to those provisions of Community law, which were according to the European treaties intended to have direct effect within member states. It meant, that a specific part of the EC law would become part of the U.K. law. It was that part, which by virtue of the EC law itself, was considered to have direct effect. This did raise disputes over the doctrine of the sovereignty of parliament, with relation to how one parliament could not bind its successors, however at any point a future parliament could repeal the legislation which gave legal effect to the ECA 1972. The result of the ECA could clearly be seen in the case of McCarthy's Ltd v Wendy Smith16. It showed that the English courts could refer to the ECJ for guidance and take effect of judgements from it17. The fundamental case that integrated the UK fully under the ECJ was R v Secretary of state for Transport ex parte Factortame18. It has been recognised as the most constitutionally significant British case highlighting the relationship between Community Law and domestic law. The House of Lords held that under common law the court had no power to make an order postponing the coming into force of a statute pending a reference to the European Court to determine its validity. However, the House of Lords referred to the European Court for a preliminary ruling19. On that basic the Hose of Lords exercised its discretion according to the balance of convenience, since in its opinion; it was doubtful whether an adequate remedy in damages to either side would be available. ...read more.

Conclusion

However, it was silent on whether an employer should have to pay the same wage to a woman who came into the employment after the male had left the job. The matter was referred by the Court of Appeal to the ECJ under Article 177. 17 Per Lord Denning "if the time should come when parliament deliberately passes an Act with the intention of repudiating the Treaty or any provision in it... then I should have thought that it would be the duty of our courts to follow the statute of our Parliament. I do not however envisage any such situation... unless there is such an intentional and express repudiation of that treaty, it is our duty to give priority to the treaty" 18 R v Secretary of State for Transport, ex p factortame ltd (no3) C-221/89. In 1988 the United Kingdom Parliament passed the Merchant Shipping Act and enacted Merchant Shipping Regulations, which prevented some Spanish fisherman from fishing in British waters. As a result, Factortame challenged these domestic requirements as incompatible with EC law, on the grounds of discrimination on the grounds of nationality contrary to Article 14 of the Treaty and the rights of companies to establishment under Articles 43-48 19 A national court was required to set aside a rule of national law which it considered was the sole obstacle preventing it from granting interim relief in a case before that court concerning Community law, if to do otherwise would impair the full effectiveness of the subsequent judgment to be given on the substantive issue of the existence of the rights claimed under Community law. 20 Javell and Oliver (2000); "the court had no choice but to employ this approach, for it couldn't invalidate the act of parliament due to the doctrine of Parliamentary sovereignty, nor could it grant interim relief... the only approach to not invalidating the statute was to reinterpret the statute to conform to EC law, thereby satisfying both." 1 Mark Roberts ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree English Legal System section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree English Legal System essays

  1. Discuss Dicey's three propositions on the concept of the Rule of Law in the ...

    Official Secrets Act or the activities of Britain's secret services (though they may not know if they are being investigated or not!) It is agreed with some justification that a modern society needs bodies like MI5 and MI6 simply because there are a tiny number of individuals who wish to subvert society and have to be dealt with accordingly.

  2. The ultra vires doctrine

    In the article published by Professor Dawn Oliver24 predicted that the term "public authority" in s.6 of the Act would be given a wide interpretation, with the sometimes undesirable consequence that institutions and organisations caught by that definition, for example charities, universities and self-regulatory bodies, would not be able to

  1. The constitutional jurisprudence of the ECJ is a paradigm of judicial activism. Discuss in ...

    With Art234 available to national courts this possibility of varying approaches to Community law can be kept to a minimum. Indeed it creates a mutual regard for all respective national jurisdictions, and encourages collaboration within each respective legal system. Further to this it acts as a vital tool to enable

  2. Parliamentary Sovereignty

    This view is reinforced by the former Lord Chancellor, Lord Irvine, in a speech given to the US Supreme Court in Washington, 1998, when he argued that the Factortame case; '...does not impair the ultimate sovereignty of Parliament, because, in giving effect in this way to Community law, the courts

  1. There is nothing in any way novel in according supremacy to the rules of ...

    EU additions, supremacy of parliament could continue in co-existence with supremacy of EU law where it is relevant. Aside from this, it must also be remembered that Parliament is not wholly bound by the decision to be incorporated into the European Committee.

  2. Discuss the operation of the doctrine of precedent in the Australian courts

    But the literal approach has a certain appeal. It allows judges to avoid personal responsibility for their decisions. The judges would only say that any results produced are due to the statute and not human behavior. This is the natural human reaction which is confronted with a difficult choice and

  1. The UK laws relating to obscenity and public outrage unduly hamper an artist's freedom ...

    to consider whether the effect of the book was to deprave and corrupt signiffficant proportion of the persons likely to read it." The issue was also addressed in R v Whyte (1972) where the question for the Magistrates was whether pornographic material, sold by the defendant, was likely to corrupt

  2. Judge-made law. When Lord Denning came up with the neighbour principle, had he developed ...

    and from being long personally accustomed to the judicial decisions of [his] predecessors.â[15] Dworkin explained that when deciding on cases, judges were not allowed unmitigated discretion but were bound by âever-valid principlesâ.[16] As such, there was no such thing as a bad law; only a wrong law.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work