Summary Lectures - Principles and Foundations of EU Law
5 views 0 purchase
Course
Principles and Foundations of EU Law (3554PFE6VY)
Institution
Universiteit Van Amsterdam (UvA)
Master EU Law - University of Amsterdam
Lecture 1: Autonomy of EU Law 1
Lecture 2: divisions of power in EU law 8
Lecture 3: Democracy and rule of law 17
Lecture 4: Mutual recognition and autonomy of Member State law 24
Lecture 5: Solidarity and equality in EU law 31
Lecture 6: Implementati...
Autonomy of EU law → internal & external dimension
1. Internal dimension of autonomy of EU Law
● Definition:
○ Internal dimension: Relationship between EU law & national legal orders of the
MS
● Specific characteristics of EU law: substance
○ Costa ENEL & van Gend → established internal dimension
○ In both cases → Court → decided on fundamental issues of EU law
■ Relationship between EU law & national law
■ Characteristics of EU law
■ Consequences for relationship with national national legal order follow
from EU law itself
a. Van Gend & Loos
● Facts
○ Decision by dutch authorities reclassifying a product → custom
tariff changed
○ Art. 234 TFEU → preliminary procedure = possibilities for
national courts to ask questions to CJEU
● Confirms that the Courts are bound to apply EU
law
● Treaties = direct effect = you as an individual
before a national court can invoke a provision
of EU law to have your case decided
○ EU law → direct effect over national law
● Courts finding
○ Treaties → created a new independent legal order
○ MS → limited their sovereign rights
○ Not only obligations between MS, but also obligations and
rights for individuals; more than an agreement creating
obligations between MS
b. Costa vs Enel
● Mr Costa → Shareholder of electricity company in Italy
● Courts findings
○ EU law is directly applicable
○ Confirms primacy of EU law
○ Treaties → created a new independent legal order
○ MS → limited their sovereign rights
, ○ Not only obligations between MS, but also obligations and
rights for individuals; more than an agreement creating
obligations between MS
● EU law = not just international law
● International law = follows from national constitutions
● → effect of EU law in national legal order = follows from national constitutional
law
- But → Court went around this → effect of EU law in national orders
does NOT depend on international law = depends on EU law and its
characteristics
→ no specific mention of autonomy in these cases yet
→ independence of EU legal order from the national legal orders = internal dimension
● Specific characteristics of EU law: take-aways
● Logic of CJEU → functionalist justification
○ EU: for its effectiveness depends on enforcement of EU law by the MS
○ But → system cannot depend on the MS for its effect = validity and
effect of EU law cannot depend on MS’s law = depends on EU law
○ EU law = precedence
● Primacy of EU law & autonomy of EU law
○ CJEU created it = not specifically in the Treaties
○ Court relied on spirit of treaty
○ Why did the MS give up their sovereignty?
○ CJEU’s view = not the only view = contested
● contestation/challenges: 2 examples of contestation:
1. national courts
● EU → depends on role national courts in enforcement EU law
○ But → primacy & autonomy EU law
○ This has been challenged by national constitutional courts
○ Conflicting claims about ultimate source of authority EU law
between CJEU & national constitutional courts
○ Where does EU authority come from?
■ Ex: international law = from constitutions of states
■ EU → foundation in EU law
● Understanding nature of challenges for EU:
○ Ex: case Bundesverfassungsgericht & Polish Constitutional
Court
○ 2 examples:
, a. Bundesverfassungsgericht (PSPP)
● Facts
○ About EU monetary policy or economic policy
○ Validity of secondary EU law
○ PSPP → Program of ECB to combat economic crisis
○ ECB → adopted PSPP = public bonds bought from MS
● Bundesverfassungsgericht asked PR
○ Challenged this
○ Asked for PR about compatibility PSPP with EU law
○ Was the ECB monetary policy or economic policy?
● CJEU = arguments
○ It is monetary policy → in line with the treaty
● Bundesverfassungsgericht = arguments
○ Decided 2 things:
1. ECB + CJEU = violation of treaty → ultra vires
(outside of the competences referred to it)
○ It challenged:
■ primacy of EU law → exclusive competence of
CJEU to interpret EU law
■ Foundations of EU law → foundation of EU law
is found in national law → in this case German
constitution
■ German court → had to review whether what is
done at EU law complies with EU law
→ Sparked a debate about legal interpretation = to what extent
is this in line with EU law?
b. Polish Constitutional Tribunal
● Context
○ Primacy of EU law → role & independence of national judiciary
○ Validity of primary EU law
○ Rule of law backsliding
● Facts
○ Polish government → asking from polish Court about
compatibility of certain elements of EU law with Polish
constitution
, ● Poland
○ EU law was in violation with Polish constitution
● Court
○ EU law was not in violation of the Polish constitution
Both cases → infringement procedure Commission
2. Academic discourse
● National constitutional courts challenging the CJEU
○ Effect of EU law in national legal order = follows from EU law itself
○ Ultimate interpreter of EU law = CJEU = contested by national courts =
Authority of EU law = found in national law
● Reasoning of case law criticised by academics → vulnerable & fragile
○ Fragility of self-referential reasoning & functional justification
○ More need to justify reasoning → such as by ethical principles
● Debate about pluralism
a. Pluralism as descriptive/explanatory theory
○ Conflict between CJEU & national courts
b. Pluralism as normative theory
○ Advocates say that this conflict is a good thing = it has benefits
○ Does not need to be solved
○ System can be trusted → mechanisms exist to deal with conflict
○ Contestations follows from legitimacy
○ Dealing with conflict → Dialogue
○ Through use of principles → solve issues
● Opponents of pluralism
○ Legal uncertainty → unacceptable → need to find a solution
○ Revise the treaties
○ Legitimacy comes from national politics
→ Internal autonomy works in practice = important to understand what is behind national
contestation
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller StudentLAW2024. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $15.18. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
