Direct and Indirect Effect

Mind Map by Terataki, updated more than 1 year ago
Created by Terataki almost 6 years ago


Mind Map on Direct and Indirect Effect, created by Terataki on 04/19/2014.

Resource summary

Direct and Indirect Effect
1 Direct Effect
1.1 Principle established in Van Gend en Loos
1.2 Defrenne v Sabena: Treaty provisions are capable of creating dir­ect effects both vertically between the state and individuals and horizontally between individuals.
1.3.1 Vertical effect only Van Duyn Marshall v S.W Area Health authority - enforced v public bodies Foster v British Gas- public service- under state control- special powers Rolls Royce plc. v Doughty- qualifications: broad interpretation cf N. T. U. v Governing body of St Mary's Church of England Faccini v Recreb- Limitations of D.E
1.3.2 Directive:To be capable of Direct effect: Conditions: Van Duyn : sufficiently clear and precise; unconditional Ratti: Time limit (D.E from the date of the deadline)
1.4 **To be capable of direct effect, Treaty articles must:** • Be sufficiently clear and precise • unconditional• Leave no room for the exercise of discretion in implementation by Member States or the EU institutions. if one is not satisfied- the article cannot have direct effect- the person cannot rely on the article
1.4.1 Where not sufficient (direct effect does not apply) : indirect effect applies: Indirect effect provide means to enforce EU rights- IMPOSES A DUTY OF consistent interpretation of national Courts principle established in Von Colson and Kamann v Land Nordhein-Westfalen Vertical and Horizontal indirect effect Court imposes this obligation to national law adopted with a duty to implement the directive - all domestic law needs to be interpreted according to the directive - at the begining was specific but the broaden in Marleasing Indirect effect is capable of vertical and horizontal direct effect in respect of Directives. Kolpinguis: CJ : the duty of consistent interpretation existed from the time the directive was adopted (but not yet implemented) The Q was subsequently put to the CJ in Adeneler : held: national Courts: positive and negative duty Limitations Wagner Miret v Fondo de Garantira Salaria Acaro
1.5 Regulations are stated in Art.189 to be “of general application”. If they are also clear and unconditional, they may be directly effective: Leonesio v Italian Ministry of Agriculture.
1.6 Grad v Finanzamt Traustein: The wording of Art.249 (ex 189) does not prevent individuals from relying in the national courts on decisions addressed to Member States. (2) The decision was directly effective; the directive merely fixed the date on which the VAT regime in the decision took effect.
Show full summary Hide full summary


direct/indirect effect & state liability
EU Cases
EU Institutions
Free movement of goods
State Liability
Faith Akinyeye
Freedom of Establishment (General)
Faith Akinyeye
Supremacy of EU LAW
Emily Bache
Preliminary Reference (Incomplete)
Faith Akinyeye
Aquis Communitaire