9. European Union Law and Institutions


  • The European Union is a supranational legal order based on treaties and general legal principles.
  • The institutions of the EU exercise legislative, executive, and judicial powers.
  • The sources of EU Law are Treaties, Regulations, Directives, Decisions, and Judgments of the European Court of Justice (ECJ).
  • Decisions of the ECJ assert that human rights form part of the general principles of EU law and Article 6 Treaty on European Union (TEU) has the effect of giving formal recognition that human rights, especially those protected by the ECHR, are part of EU law and are protected by the ECJ.
  • Regulations are ‘directly applicable’ in all member states, while a Decision is binding upon those to whom it is addressed and a Directive is binding, as to the result to be achieved, upon each member state to whom it is addressed but leaves to the national authorities the choice of form and methods.
  • The transfer by the states from their domestic legal systems to the Community legal system of the rights and obligations arising under the Treaty carries with it a limitation of their sovereign rights, against which a subsequent unilateral act incompatible with the concept of the Community cannot prevail while they remain members of the EU.
  • Substantive Community rights prevail over the express terms of any domestic law, including primary legislation, made or passed after the coming into force of the 1972 Act, even in the face of plain inconsistency between the two.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sion v Hampstead Health Authority [1994] EWCA Civ 26

Facts: S appealed against the High Court’s decision to strike out his statement of claim for personal injury damages on the grounds that no reasonable cause of action was disclosed. S brought an action against the hospital alleging their negligent treatment of his son caused him to suffer psychiatric injury. Ratio: Appeal dismissed. However, even where a statement of claim disclosed no cause of action, the court had discretion to permit the plaintiff to amend it out of time provided that the proposed amendment arose from the facts in the pleading. S was unable to recover for psychiatric harm sustained as a result of watching his son die over a period of 14 days while becoming increasingly aware that the hospital was negligent in its treatment of him.
Read more

R. (on the application of Abbasi) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2002] EWCA Civ 1598, (2002)

Facts: The first claimant was a British national who had been captured by the United States forces in Afghanistan and detained in Guantanamo Bay as an 'enemy combatant' He was deprived of access to court proceedings and legal advice, and applied for judicial review in the UK seeking to compel the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs either to intervene with the US government or alternatively to explain the omission to do so Issue: Whether the court had jurisdiction to review the decision by the Secretary of State not to intervene Whether the UK government had any duty to protect the claimant as one of its citizens Held: The Court could review the decisions on grounds of rationality and legitimate expectation The Court held that there was no legal duty on the state to protect its citizens in such circumstances
Read more

Summarise and discuss Lord Bingham’s eight ‘sub-rules’ of the Rule of Law.

Lord Bingham based his view about the rule of law on three key assumptions: Everyone should be equally bound by and entitled to the benefit of the law. Laws must be publicly and prospectively published. Laws should be publicly administered in the courts. The law must be accessible, intelligible, clear and predictable. Bingham’s rule of law suggests that it cannot exist without democracy. The rule of law is a kind of implicit contract between the state and the individual.
Read more