Enforceability of EU law before a National Court Flashcards Preview

EU Law - UoL > Enforceability of EU law before a National Court > Flashcards

Flashcards in Enforceability of EU law before a National Court Deck (22):
1

What is the definition of Direct Effect?

When EU law give rise to rights and obligations that an individual may enforce before their national courts

2

What sort of effect have Treaty Articles?

Direct vertical effect established in Van Gend and horizontal direct effect established in Defrenne v SABENA

3

What sort of effect have Regulations?

Direct vertical effect established in Leonesio and direct horizontal effect established in Antonio Munoz.
According to Art. 288 TFEU they are of general application, they take immediate effect without need for further implementation

4

What sort of effect have Directives?

Direct vertical effect established in Van Duyn.
Marshall v Southampton affirmed that Directives do not have horizontal effect.

5

What are the Van Gend criteria?

1. Clear
2. Precise
3. Unconditional

6

What must have happened for a claim against a Directive to be possible?

The time-limit for implementation must have passed - Ratti.

7

What are the Foster v British Gas guidelines?

1. Carries out a public service pursuant to a statutory duty
2. Service is under state control
3. Body has special powers for carrying out its functions

8

Which case established that not all the Foster guidelines need to be satisfied when applied in UK courts?

NUT v St Mary's School; no special powers, not ruled on by ECJ

9

Which case is an example of a private company held as an emanation of the State?

Griffin v South-West Water; heavy Government regulation and special powers

10

Which case is an example of a State owned company not held as an emanation of the State?

Doughty v Rolls Royce; lack of special powers and no statutory duty

11

What is the definition of indirect effect?

Claimant argues that national law should be interpreted in line with EU Directive

12

Which case in the UK established that the purposive approach will be used when Parliament passes national legislation intended to comply with obligations under an EU directive, in that it will be interpreted to give effect to that Directive?

Pickstone v Freemans

13

Which UK case stated that the courts may imply into the UK legislation the extra wording required to give effect to the Directive?

Lister v Forth Dry Dock

14

Which case removed the distinction between implementing and non-implementing legislation?

Marleasing

15

Which case established that any UK legislation passed before or after the Directive, must be interpreted in line with the EU law so far as is possible?

Webb v EMO

16

Which case stated that when there is a clear conflict between the UK legislation and the directive, UK courts will be reluctant to 'interpret national legislation in line with EU directive'?

Wagner Miret

17

Under what conditions may C bring a claim against the state established in Francovich v Italy?

State liability for a breach of EU law stands where:
a) the directive confers a right to individuals;
b) the right is identifiable in the provision of the directive; and
c) a breach in the implementation of the directive has caused C to suffer loss

18

What is the test for state liability according to Factortame?

State is liable where:
a) breach infringes a rule of law intended to confer rights on individuals;
b) breach is sufficiently serious; and
c) there is a direct causal link between the breach of the State's obligation and C's loss

19

What is sufficiently serious in accordance with Factortame?

1. Incorrect implementation
2. Non-implementation
3. Failure to make art. 267 reference

20

What factors are considered to conclude incorrect implementation?

1. Clarity & precision of the rule breached;
2. Whether the error of law is excusable; and
3. Whether the position taken by an EU institution has contributed

21

Which case established that failure to implement a directive is always sufficiently serious?

Dillenkofer

22

Which case established that the breach will only be sufficiently serious if the failure to refer was made in manifest breach of ECJ case law?

Kobler