Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-m9pkr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-09T03:33:29.519Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

European Community Law in National Courts: a Continuing Contradiction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2009

Christine Boch  and
Robert Lane
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Unless the law is enforced, it cannot command respect. Securing proper observance and protection of Community rights has long been recognized to be a fundamental challenge for the Community. The burden falls principally to the national courts, guided by the European Court of Justice. However, the guidance offered appears at times at variance with itself. It seems in particular that, in some instances, the obligation of result laid down in directives simply cannot be achieved. This article looks at the case law on remedies developed by the European Court, seeks to identify inconsistencies therein and suggests how they might be cured.

Type
Leading Articles
Information
Leiden Journal of International Law , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , October 1992 , pp. 171 - 185
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation of the Leiden Journal of International Law 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Case 26/62. Algemene Transport Onderneming van Gend en Loos v. Nederlandse Administratie der Belastingen, ECR 1963, 1.

2. See the Declaration on An. 100A of the EEC Treaty attached to the Single European Act

3. See Art. A of the Maastricht Treaty on European Union, and Art. 3b of the European Community Treaty i.e. the EEC Treaty as amended by the Maastricht Treaty.

4. Case 45/76, Comet v. Produktschap voor Siergewassen, ECR 1976, 2053.

5. Case 14/84, von Colson and Kamann v. Land Nordrhein-Westfalen, ECR 1984, 1909; emphasis added.

6. Case C-177/88, Dekker v. Stichting Vormingscentrum voor Jong Volwassenen Plus, ECR1990, 1–3976; emphasis added.

7. Case C-213/89, R v. Secretary of State for Transport, exparte Factortame, ECR 1990, 1–2473.

8. Case 106/77, Amministrazione delle Rnanze dello Stato v. Simmenthal, ECR 1978, 629.

9. Id., at 644; emphasis added.

10. See ICIC, infra note 27.

11. See supra text accompanying notes 4 and 5; see also Case 33/76, Rewe v. Landwirtschaftskammer für das Saarland, ECR 1976, 1989.

12. See, e.g., Case 45/76, Comet, supra note 4; Case 199/82, Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato v. San Giorgio, ECR 1983, 1909.

13. Case 33/76, Rewe, supra note 11, at 1998; Case 45/76, Comet, supra note 4, at 2053; Case 199/82, San Giorgio, supra note 12.

14. Case C-213/89, supra note 7.

15. R v. Secretary of State for Transport, exparte Factortame 3 CMLR 1 (1989).

16. The Court of Justice declined to provide guidance as to when a national court ought to provide a remedy ad interim, notwithstanding the express request from the House of Lords to do so. Some guidance is now available from the later judgements of the court in cases C-143/88 and C-92/89, Zuckerfabrik Stiderdithmarschen v. Hauptzollamt Itzehoe and Zuckerfabrik Soest v. Hauptzollamt Paderbom, ECR 1991, 1–415.

17. Case C-177/88, supra note 6.

18. Case 14/84, supra note 5.

19. An effectively identical issue has come before the Court again in the second incarnation of the Marshall case; see Case C-271/91, Marshall v. Southwest Hampshire Health Authority, lodged at the Court on October 17, 1991 (pending).

20. Cases C-6 & 9/90. Francovich v. Italian Republic, judgement of November 19. 1991. not yet reported.

21. For a survey of national law in the area see F. Schockweiler. Le régime de la responsabilite extracontractuelle du fait d’actes juridiques dans la Comnumauté’ Européenne, 1990 RTDE 27.

22. Case 6/64, Costa v. ENEL, ECR 1964, 585.

23. See, e.g., Costa v. ENEL, I Giur Ital 9 (1964), (Corte Cost.).

24. Case 11/70, Internationale Handelsgesellschaft mbH v. Einfuhrund Vorratstelle fiirGetreide und Futtermittel, ECR 1970, 1125.

25. Case 41/74, van Duyn v. Home Office, ECR 1974, 1337.

26. For the former, see the ‘Solange’-judgement, BVerfGE 37, at 271, for the latter see Ministre de I’lntérieur v. Cohn-Bendit, December 22, 1978, Rec Lebon 524.

27. The process of adaptation can be traced in Italy through Frontini v. Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato (1974) I Giur Ital 513; ICIC v. Ministero del Commareio Estero (1976) I Giur Ital 209; and Granital v. Amministrazione Finanzaria dello Stato (1984) I Giur Ital 1521 (all Corte Cost.); for Germany see ‘Vielleicht’, BVerfGE 52, at 187; ‘Solange II’, BVerfGE 73, at 339: and (a retrograde step) ‘Wenn Nicht’ (1990) NJW 974; for France see Nicolo, October 20, 1989, Rec p. 190: Boisdet, September 24, 1990, Rec p. 250.

28. Case 106777, Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato v. Simmenthal, ECR 1978, at 645; emphasis added.

29. Case 26/62, van Gend en Loos, supra note 1.

30. See generally H. Rasmussen, On Law and Policy in the European Court of Justice (1986) and in this particular area D. Curtin, The Province of Government, ELRev 195 (1990).

31. Case 41/74, supra note 25.

32. Directive 64/221, O.J. 1964, 850.

33. Directive 75/117, O.J. 1975, L45/19; Directive 76/207, O.J. 1976, L 39/40; Directive 79/7, O.J. 1979, L 6/24; Directive 86/378, O.J. 1986, L 225/40; Directive 86/613, OJ. 1986, L 359/56.

34. Directive 85/374, O.J. 1985, L 210/29.

35. Case 148/78, Ministero Publico v. Ratti, ECR 1979, 1629.

36. Case 8/81, Becker v. Finanzamt Miinster-lnnenstadt, ECR 1982, 53.

37. Case41/74, supra note 25, at 1355, quoting Case 33/70, S ACE, ECR 1970, 1213; emphasis in original.

38. Case 152/84, Marshall v. Southwest Hampshire Health Authority, ECR 1986, 749.

39. See most recently Case C-221/88, ECSC v. Busseni, ECR 1990, 1–495.

40. Case 43/75, Defrenne v. SABENA, ECR 1976, 455.

41. See the Opinion of Advocate General Roemer in van Gend en Loos, at 23–25.

42. P. Manin, L’invocabilité des Directives: Quelques considerations, RTDE 690 (1990).

43. Case C-188/89, Foster v. British Gas, ECR 1990, 1–3313; see also the cases cited therein at 1–3348.

44. Case 43/75, Defrenne v. SABENA, supra note 40.

45. Directive 75/117, O.J. 1975, L 45/19.

46. Case 43/75, Defrenne, supra note 40, at 478; Case 96/80, Jenkins v. Kingsgate (Clothing Productions) Ltd., ECR 1981, 911.

47. Case C-262/88 Barber v. Guardian Royal Exchange, ECR 1990, 1–1889, implicitly overruling Case 80/70, Defrenne v. Belgian State, ECR 1971, 445.

48. P. Manin, supra note 42, at 690.

49. Case 14/84, supra note 5.

50. Case 80/86, Officier van Justitie v. Kolpinghuis Nijmegen, ECR 1987, 3969.

51. Case C-106/89, Marleasing v. La Comercial Intemaciónal de Alimentation, ECR 1990, 1–4135.

52. J. Shaw, European Community Judicial Method: Its Application to Sex Discrimination Law, ILJ 229 (1990); emphasis in original.

53. Case C-177/88, supra note 6, at 1–3959.

54. Emphasis in original.

55. Case C-262/88, Barber, supra note 47 at 1–1936.

56. Case 22/70, Commission v. Council (ERTA), ECR 1971, 276–277; emphasis added. For a recent example of this approach see Case C-303/90, France v. Commission (Code of Conduct), judgement of November 13, 1991, not yet reported.

57. Case 322/88, Grimaldi v. Fonds des Maladies Professionelles, ECR 1989, 4407.

58. Cases 6 & 9/90, Francovich, supra note 20.

59. C/Paras. 17 and 40 of Francovich.

60. Pickstone v. Freemans, AC 1989, 66; Litster v. Forth Dry Lock Ltd., AC 1990, 546

61. Duke v. GEC Reliance, AC 1988, 618; Rnnegan v. Clowney Youth Training Programme, WLR 1990, 1305.

62. See the European Communities Act 1972, S. 2(1).

63. However, the English Court of Appeal has not been sufficiently impressed by Marleasing to venture from the approach adopted in Duke; see Webb v. EMO Cargo (U.K.) Ltd., 1 CMLR 793 (1992).

64. See Case 36/74, Walrave and Koch v. Association Union Cycliste Internationale, ECR 1974, 1405.

65. Case C-10/89, SA CNL-Sucal NV v. Hag GF AG, ECR 1990, 1–3711.

66. Case C-262/88, supra note 47, at 1–1938-1939.