Talk:Direct effect of European Union law

Untitled

hello, You write that the Court:

stated that European Community regulations could (and should) be tried before national courts, since the regulations have a direct effect on individuals' rights and responsibilities similar to that of national laws.

It seems misleading, since in van Gend they referred to direct effect of treaty provisions. The word regulation has a specific meaning, since it is one of categories of EC legislation as defined in art. 249 (Treaty of Rome). Moreover some scholars suggest that the term direct applicability should be used regarding regulations, not direct effect.

What they said in van Gend was (sorry for capitalics):

IT FOLLOWS FROM THE FOREGOING CONSIDERATIONS THAT, ACCORDING TO THE SPIRIT, THE GENERAL SCHEME AND THE WORDING OF THE TREATY, ARTICLE 12 MUST BE INTERPRETED AS PRODUCING DIRECT EFFECTS AND CREATING INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS WHICH NATIONAL COURTS MUST PROTECT . http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:61962J0026:EN:HTML

(now it is art. 25, not 12).

Since I never edited or created Wikipedia article, i write about it here. And I might suggest that regulations should be changed to either "EC Treaty provisions" (which derives directly from van Gend) or to "EC law" which however may be found to general.

regards

Simmilarity with "common law"

Direct effect appears to be an evolving judicial law, analogous to "common law". Perhaps a section showing similarities/differences would be useful? Fig (talk) 23:06, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

EU law in general, not just direct effect, applies a system of precedent comparable to the common law, although I not sure we'd be safe saying that stare decisis applies. We'd need some appropriate academic commentary on this topic before we put it in the article though. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 15:33, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Direct effect of European Union law. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726140849/http://www.hanselawreview.org/pdf8/Vol5No2Art02.pdf to http://www.hanselawreview.org/pdf8/Vol5No2Art02.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:10, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Adding it to Category: EUropean Union Law

Maybe adding it to this category would make the whole affair of tagging much more easier? Chefs-kiss (talk) 11:24, 8 September 2021 (UTC)