Essay
Essay European Constitutional Law - EU Law and Domestic Law
- Module
- European Constitutional Law
- Institution
- Queens University Belfast (QUB)
Supremacy of EU Law over Domestic Law
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
Content preview
SCHOOL OF LAWCOURSEWORKCOVERSHEET
This sheet should be completed and included in your coursework submission.
ASSIGNMENT DETAILS
Module Title & Code: EU Constitutional Law Module Code: LAW 2050 and 3097
Student Number: 40342490
Assignment’s Full Title: Assessed Coursework FIRST SIT
WORD COUNT
(excluding bibliography, but including footnotes)
Assigned word count for the essay: 3500
The actual number of words in the
essay: 3429
Penalties will be imposed for work that exceeds the prescribed word limitation. The penalties for exceeding
the word limitation are:
up to 10% over the limit, deduct 5 marks;
5 further marks deducted for each subsequent 10%.
Word count penalties will be applied strictly.
SUBMISSION DEADLINE
Deadline: by 12 noon on: 13th December 2021
in line with University and School of Law Regulations, the penalty for late submission is a reduction
of 5 marks for each calendar day late or part thereof, up to a maximum of 5 calendar days late.
Work received after that point will receive a mark of 0.
UNIVERSITY REGULATIONS
By submitting work to the School you accept that you are 1) fit to be examined and 2) have
reviewed and understood the University Regulations on examinations, including those on academic
offences.
, Question 1
On October 2021, Warsaw yet again fuelled its long running confrontation with Brussel by
challenging the supremacy of European Union (EU) law. The Polish Constitutional Tribunal
ruled that European regulations are inconsistent with the Polish constitution thus
inapplicable within the state.1 It has been 6 decades since the introduction of the principle
of supremacy of EU law by the European Court of Justice (ECJ). However, even after all this
time, this principle is still shrouded with a considerable degree of ambiguity and call forth
debate on the relationship between national law and the supremacy of EU law. There is no
definitive material to define which of the legal system, national or European will take
precedence when contradict with one another. The attitude of ECJ and nationals’ supreme
courts differ in attempting by their practice to define this issue. The position of ECJ is
grounded on absolute perfect functioning and execution of EU Law and maintaining
supranational character primacy.2 Meanwhile, certain member state’s supreme courts
practice constitutional primacy and high-quality assurance of basic rights and maintenance
of their role and function. A state’s tendency to benefit EU law can be determined through
the consequences of courts’ decision in cases where equality of EU law and state’s
constitution are assessed.3
This paper will attempt to provide an accurate reflection of the supremacy of EU law today
through a series of discussion on recent development, targeting the ECJ’s decision on
conflicting interest between EU law and national law; and the attitude of state’s
constitutional courts on the principle.
The issue of which legal system has priority arose before national courts will be referred to
the ECJ for clarifications under the procedure provided in Article 267 TFEU4. At the forefront
of introducing this principle is the case of Van Gend en Loos, which is often regarded as the
leading case which the ECJ took it upon themselves to firmly establish the principle of
supremacy of Community law as a requisite requirement for the continuation of the
1
Henry Foy, ‘Brussels vows to punish Poland for challenging supremacy of EU law’ Financial Times (Strasbourg,
19 October 2021)
2
European Court of Justice decision: Opinion 2/13 Article 218 (11) TFEU - Draft international agreement -
Accession of the European Union to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms - Compatibility of the draft agreement with the EU and FEU Treaties, [2014]
3
Giorgi Martinsville, 'Doctrine of Supremacy of the European Union Law over Member
State's Constitutions according to the Melloni Case' (2018) 2018 J Const L 101
4
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, article 267
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 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 venessaty. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for £4.79. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
60281 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 14 years now