Direct effect in the EU Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Direct resolution in the EU right - Essay ExampleThis paper shall discuss the development of the doctrine of aim effect, the issues arising therefrom, and how the European Court of Justice resolved them. Moreover, it shall examine the dynamics in the relationship between the EU and the member-states and their one-on-one citizens. Finally, it shall look into how the courts settle issues with regard to conflict arising from the implementation or non-implementation of EU laws and directives. Supremacy of EU Law The principle of supremacy of the EU law holds that in the event of conflict between the r dismissers of EU law and domestic law, the EU law shall prevail.1 This principle is anchored on the fact that when states signed the treaty creating the source EEC, the members had also signed off a part of their self-directedty to spend a penny a new sovereign that can bind both the state and its individual citizens.2 The Preamble of the treaty on European pith declared in no unc ertain terms that it aims to establish a citizenship common to studys of their countries3 and create an even closer union among the peoples of Europe, in which decisions are taken as closely as assertable to the citizen in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity.4 Finally, the supremacy of EU law is sanctioned by the Treaty on European Union itself which mandates all states to facilitate the achievement of the Communitys tasks and abstain from every measure which could jeopardise the attainment of the objectives of this Treaty.5 Aptly, the European Court of Justice interpreted the foregoing provision as a conferment of judicial and enforceable rights unto the individual citizens of member states. EU treaties produce direct effects and individual rights which national courts must protect.6 Needless to state, concomitant with the exercise of these rights is compliance with the obligations created by virtue of the Treaty. Doctrine of Direct Effect The landmark character of Va n Gend en Loos saw the have of the doctrine of direct effect which made the EU law a reliable source of statutory rights and obligations for parties litigating cases before domestic courts. In particular, the Court ruled that Article 30 of the Treaty on the cognitive operation of the European Union (TFEU) which prohibits the imposition of custom duties within the Union has confered rights upon the individual nationals which may not be impaired by domestic laws and which may be invoked before national courts.7 Apparently, the realm of treaties does not end with member states it extends further to individual citizens, vested rights and imposed obligations alike. The court has upheld the rights acquired by individual citizens by virtue of the feed of the Treaty and declared that it must be interpreted as producing direct effects and creating individual rights which national courts must protect.8 Van Gend en Loos became the controlling jurisprudence insofar as direct effect of treati es is concerned. However, subsequent cases had pushed the bar and thus expanded the doctrines application to include other forms of EU legislations. Seven years after the 1963 case of Van Gend en Loos, the Court ruled in the case of Grad v Finanzamt Traunstein that provisions of Council Decisions are also capable of producing direct effects in the legal relationships between the member states to which the decision is addressed and those subject to their jurisdiction.