ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Education and Science»
  • Law & Legal Issues

Direct Effect - EU Law

Updated on May 11, 2014

This hub contains the vital pieces of information - landmark cases and their significance - about the doctrine of direct effect.

It features a list of core cases which must be learnt at the start, a following explanation of each one, and then a final revision list with keywords in order to stimulate memorisation.

Good luck!

The Core List of EU Direct Effect Cases

  1. Van Gend en Loos [1963]
  2. Van Duyn v Home Office [1974]
  3. Defrenne v Sabena [1976]
  4. Ratti [1979]
  5. Marshall v Southampton [1986], Duke [1988]
  6. Foster v British Gas [1990]
  7. Frankovich [1990]

Van Gend en Loos [1963]

Get used to this name because the need to recall Van Gend en Loos [1963] will undoubtedly surface in most of your EU law exams.

Its significance lies in that it is the EU law case in which the ECJ decided there is vertical direct effect of Treaty provisions so long as they are:

  1. Clear/Precise - There is an obvious obligation and not just a general aim e.g. Article 4(3) which states that member states must work together to achieve the goals of the EU
  2. Unconditional - The fulfillment of the detailed obligation must not depend on the action of an EU body e.g. Articles 107-109 concern State Aid which negatively affects inter-member trade are not directly effective because they depend on the ruling of the Commission. This is a 'condition' of the fulfillment of these acts and therefore they are not unconditional as required by the test in Van Gend en Loos.
  3. Confer a right onto individuals - only that which relates to rights found in EU articles can be enforced in domestic courts, nothing more.

Defrenne v Sabena [1976]

Just as Van Gend en Loos [1963] birthed vertical direct effect for Treaty Articles, Defrenne v Sabena [1976] did the same for horizontal direct effect.

This is the right to enforce EU rights against fellow individuals, as opposed to enforcing them against public bodies (vertical direct effect).

Thus, in Defrenne v Sabena a flight attendant enforced the right for equal pay for equal work as expounded in Article 157 TFEU against the airline Sabena. This was a landmark decision because a private company is an individual and not a public body - now it is the case that individuals can use EU rights against each other and so EU law is far more effective/intrusive than before.

Regulations

Although Van Gend en Loos [1963] and Defrenne v Sabena [1976] concerned the direct effect of Treaty articles, they did not consider regulations or directives.

As a reminder, EU regulations are comparable to 'Acts of Parliament' in that they function as primary legislation to achieve certain results. What they contain is law and is immediately and simultaneously binding on all member states. This is so expounded in Article 288 in which regulations are described as 'directly applicable'.

Van Duyn v Home Office [1974]

Article 288 explains that directives are:

"binding, as to the result to be achieved, upon each Member State to which it is addressed, but shall leave to the national authorities the choice of form and methods."

What this means is that directives need to be assimilated into national law before they take effect, contrasting regulations which are in effect as soon as they are finished.

What the ECJ decided in Van Duyn [1974] however was that directives do have vertical direct and so rights contained within them can be enforced by individuals against their member state. This was so that the effect of directives was not significantly weakened.

Ratti [1979]

In Ratti [1979] it was clarified that directives can only be enforced by individuals of member states after the time given to implement the directive has lapsed.

What this means is the EU gives the chance for a member state to decide its own way of implementing the details of the directive, but if it does not do so in time its citizens have the right to enforce it directly against them in their domestic courts.

Marshall v Southampton [1986] and Duke [1988]

Marshall v Southampton [1986] was the case in which it was first said, albeit dictum, that directives are not horizontally directly effective.

Marshall v Southampton [1986] involved a claimant enforcing a directive right against a hospital, falling under the purview of state or emanation of state.

It was in Duke [1988] that enforcement of directive rights were denied on the grounds that the claim was against an individual and not a public body.

Foster v British Gas [1990]

Since there is a great divide between vertical and horizontal direct effect based on what is or isn't a public body, Foster provides great value by outlining exactly what is an 'emanation of state' with respect to vertical direct effect.

A public body or 'emanation of state is any body which:

  • Is under the control or authority of the state, or
  • Has special powers beyond those which normally occur between individuals.

British Gas was considered an emanation of state in Foster [1990] despite it being recently privatised.

The ECJ's "Frankovich's Monster"
The ECJ's "Frankovich's Monster"

Frankovich v Italy [1990]

Frankovich [1990] held that if a member state let the situation arise where either domestic law was completely contrary to EU law, or the directive in question was not properly implemented, it will be liable for any damages caused as a result.

Consequently, if it can be proved by an individual that the directive conferred particular rights and the absence of those rights lead to his loss, the state must pay damages.

Note: this case applies where a directive is not clear or unambiguous enough to be directly effective, but still confers some rights.

Core List and Keywords

  1. Van Gend en Loos [1963] - Vertical direct effect of Treaty Articles
  2. Van Duyn v Home Office [1974] - Vertical direct effect of directives
  3. Defrenne v Sabena [1976] - Horizontal direct effect of Treaty Articles
  4. Ratti [1979] - Directives only have vertical direct effect after implementation time lapses
  5. Marshall v Southampton [1986] - No horizontal direct effect for directives (obiter dictum)
  6. Duke [1988] - No horizontal direct effect for directives (ratio decidendi)
  7. Foster v British Gas [1990] - definition of 'emanation of state': special powers due to state
  8. Frankovich [1990] - If the state fails to implement a directive properly or in time, individuals can sue it for damages they have faced as a result. This is instead of suing the individual who - due to the state's failure - was under no obligation to and so did no follow the directive.
  9. Faccini Dori [1995] - followed the Frankovich principle.

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No comments yet.

    working

    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: "https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr"

    Show Details
    Necessary
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Features
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Marketing
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Statistics
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)