• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

The ECJ's primary purpose in creating the concept of direct effect was to ensure the efficient development of the Union, rather than to empower the individual. Discuss.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

The ECJ's primary purpose in creating the concept of direct effect was to ensure the efficient development of the Union, rather than to empower the individual. Discuss. The European Community Treaty was formed for the economic integration between the Member States that can be achieved through their fundamental principles. The Fundamental principles1 are: The free movement of goods, workers, capital and services, The creation of common custom tariff for the regulation and administration of trade between the community and non-community countries, The establishment of common commercial policy for the economic relations between community and rest of the world, and The making of economic policies between the member states for their benefit. When these policies are to be achieved, problems would even start arising between Member States. For solving these problems of the community, European Court of Justice has come into existence. The main purpose of European Court of Justice is: To hear actions between Member states and Community as well as by individuals against the acts of Community institution, It takes into consideration the right of Court to award damages for unlawful acts committed by the Community institutions, and It refers to the cases by national courts of Member States on matter relating to the interpretation and application of the Community law. When a state joins the European Union, all Community law becomes part of its own system. The European Court of Justice2 has developed a concept of direct effect, whereby provision of Community law can confer right on an individual which can directly be applied by National Courts, if required. Art 249 (ex 189) ...read more.

Middle

The duty to implement Directive is absolute: no excuses such as slowness of the legislative process, governmental crisis etc. are brooked by the Court of Justice as potential justification for failure to do so.15 Indeed, non-implementation is a breach not only of the specific provisions of Art 249 of the EC Treaty but also of the duty of Community "solidarity" as enshrined in Art 10 of the EC Treaty. Central to this notion of Solidarity is the protection of individual rights since the non-implementation by a Member State may prejudice the legal position of the individual who finds himself subject to two sets of contradictory rules.16 Art 249 nevertheless confers upon Member State discretion as to the "choice of form and method" with which it implements a Directive into national law. Here the Member States are given the widest possible choice of possibilities as far as implementation of Directive into national law is concerned. Where the directive is intended to create rights for individuals, the legal position arising from these principles is sufficiently precise, clear and transparent and where appropriate those individuals are afforded the possibility of relying on their enforceable rights before the national courts.17 The concept of direct effect is a product of the jurisprudence of the Court and in the context of directives it has been elaborated, at least in recent years, in terms of reflex effect rather in the nature of estoppel - it only occurs when a Member State has failed to perform its obligations, and this cannot be the case until the time limit for the performance of those obligations ...read more.

Conclusion

If the directive was for the benefit of individuals, (2) The content of those rights are identifiable to the directive and (3) If there is a link between the breach of Member States obligation and the damage suffered by the individual. From the above discussion of concept and Judgment of various cases, we can see that European Court of Justice was mainly developed to take care of the European Community Law. When the Community Law was developed it was mainly for the benefit of the Member States. Member States always had the problem between national law and community law. Later on from the case of Costa v. ENEL, it was proved that Community law prevails over the national law i.e. Community Law is supreme. The main purpose of Community law was to make a common market between Member States; they achieved this goal by making Single Market Act. This act developed four free movements: free movement of goods, capital, workers and services. From here the problems did start between individuals and state, as every Member State sometimes interpreted community law in a different manner. ECJ was formed for efficiently running of the European Union. But due to many problems which did occur from community law such as: free movement, misinterpretation of the community law, due to problems with implementing the directives on which people have already started working on, this all caused different problems, therefore ECJ had to start taking more cases concerning the problems of individuals. So that individuals do get proper justice. ECJ do work for the betterment of the European Union and it even gives right to Member State to come with the problem of individuals. ...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 European Union Law 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 European Union Law essays

  1. The democratic deficit is a concept created by the euro sceptics regarding the European ...

    Another very important change made by the enactment of the Treaty of Lisbon is the requirement of the European Parliament's assent for all international agreements in fields governed by the ordinary legislative procedure. The Treaty of Lisbon also changed the functions and rights of national parliaments.

  2. Eu Directives Problem Case. Difficulties arise in situations such as the one faced by ...

    In Marlesing SA v la commercial internacionel de alimentacion14whereas Von Colson involved an improperly implemented Directive, this case concerned a Directive that had never been implemented at all. Spain had never implemented the Directive and Spanish law conflicted with its provisions.

  1. Reform of the ultra vires rule: A personal view.

    of the requirement of good faith in s35 of the Companies Act 1985: 'Many third parties ... will have acquired knowledge of the company's objects, some such as banks will have actually obtained copies of memorandum and articles, and although knowledge and good faith are not synonymous, the threat that

  2. Free movement of capital and payments. Although the 1957 Treaty of Rome included ...

    public security.15 This is a three-pronged exception, which is a mixture of concern for fiscal supervision and a standard public policy exception. In the Eurobonds case16, the prohibition on the acquisition by Belgian residents of securities of a loan issued abroad was not justified.

  1. With reference to the works of two or more comparative lawyers and other sources, ...

    There are bilateral trade agreements, regional trade agreements and multinational trade agreements. As Professor Bonell stated "the present state of international trade law is far from satisfactory. Cross-border transactions continue to a large extent to be subject to national laws which not only may vary considerably in content, but are

  2. What was the relationship between the Factortame case and the Treaty of Rome 1957?

    this Act, shall be construed and have effect subject to the foregoing provisions of this section; but, except as may be provided by any Act passed after this Act, Schedule 2 shall have effect in connection with the powers conferred by this and the following sections of this Act to

  1. EU Law - Albatros Pool problem case. Mark and Sunita must be advised that ...

    Mark can be advised that it is the Foster case which establishes that a public body is defined as any body made responsible for providing a public service under the auspices and control of the state "which has for that purpose special powers beyond which result from the normal rules applicable in relations between individuals".

  2. EU LAW Directives Problem Case - Grace would make a claim for discriminatory against ...

    As the Retirement Directive precedes the Act, it can be inferred that the court will apply the interpretive obligation despite the fact that it will distort the meaning of the domestic legislation. Grace may also have a claim against the UK for failure to implement the directive.

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