Busy. Please wait.
Log in with Clever

show password
Forgot Password?

Don't have an account?  Sign up 
Sign up using Clever

Username is available taken
show password

Make sure to remember your password. If you forget it there is no way for StudyStack to send you a reset link. You would need to create a new account.
Your email address is only used to allow you to reset your password. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.

Already a StudyStack user? Log In

Reset Password
Enter the associated with your account, and we'll email you a link to reset your password.
Didn't know it?
click below
Knew it?
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.

  Normal Size     Small Size show me how

EU Law

Internationale Handelsgesellchaft Principle of Supremacy, EU Law takes precedence over national constitutions - originates general principles of EU Law
General Principles of EU Law Unclear, Right to Equal Treatment, Non-Discrimination etc
Hauer {Vine, Germany, Property Rights}, Must be proportionate
Treaty of Amsterdam Possibility to suspend state for serious and persistent breach of fundamental rights
Article 7 TEU Risk of serious breach of EU Values, Existence of Serious Breach, Council must reach 4/5 Majority
Lisbon on ECFR Fundamental Rights shall constitute general principles of the Union's Law
Scope of Application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights Article 51
Scope of Charter Only when implementing EU Law
Léger {French, MSM Blood}, Implementing Directive, Non-Discrimination
Fransson Fishing on Swedish/Finnish Border, Tax Fraud, VAT comes within EU Law as Central Fund exists
Siragusa Planning Permission does not come within scope of EU Law
Siragusa Test Implementing EU Law requires a certain degree of connection above and beyond the matters being covered being closely related or one of those matters having an indirect impact on the other
Costa v ENEL Principle of Supremacy
Internationale Handelsgesellschaft Primacy EU Law not subject to ANY provision of national law
Simmenthal Every National Court has duty to apply EU Law in its entirety
MJELR v WRC Irish Equality Tribunal has no EU jurisdiction, pending outcome
Factortame Disapplied UK Parliamentary Sovereignty, EU Law applies regardless of national rules
Taricco If disapplying national law entails a breach of the rights of defendants, the national court is not obliged to do so.
Van Gend en Loos {German chemicals, customs tariff}
Direct Effect Requirements General Clear and Precise, Unconditional, Don't require further implementation
Petrie {Italian foreign language lecturer, sought access to case documents}
Petrie (2) Failed because not unconditional
Defrenne v SABENA {Equal Pay}
Carbonari {Trainee Doctor Remuneration}
Carbonari (2) Not unconditional
Van Duyn v Home Office {Scientology}
Van Duyn Criteria Clear and Precise, Unconditional, Time Limit Expired
Ratti {Solvent labeling prosecution}
Ratti (2) Time limit had not expired
Wallonie Must refrain from taking any measures liable seriously to compromise the result prescribed
Marshall v Southampton AHA {60/65 Retirement} - Public Hospital Emanation of State
Foster v British Gas Bodies which where subject to the authority or control of the State or had special powers beyond those which result from the normal rules applicable to relations between individuals
Farrell v Whitty {MIBI, emanation of state}
Whitty Test Task in Public Interest and Special Powers
AMS {Right to Elect Staff Representatives}
Direct Effect of ECFR Other principles can be invoked but not yet tested
Mangold v Helm {Fixed Term Contracts, Germany}
Mangold (2) Succeeded using general principle of equal treatment
Van Colson Established principle of sincere cooperation
Marleasing {Sought to avoid debt third party company}
Marleasing (2) Indirect Effect can be invoked horizontally
Adeneler v ELOG Indirect effect can only be invoked after time limit expires
Adeneler (2) The Wallonie Principle applies also to Indirect Effect
Wagner Miret If it is impossible to interpret legislation, no indirect effect
IMPACT Cannot retrospectively interpret laws through indirect effect
Ajos National Courts must diverge from established case law through indirect effect
Legitimate Expectations Indirect Effect Divergence from case law does not disturb
Unilever Italia v Central Foods {Olive Oil Law, Three Parties}
Wells v Secretary of State for Transport {Quarry}
Wells Principle Individuals can rely on EU directives against government even where this has adverse repercussions on the rights of third parties
Francovich {Successful State Liability, Insolvency}
Francovich Principles Directive grants rights, content of rights can be identified, causal link
Brasserie du Pecheur {German Beer Quality Laws, foreign could not access market}
Brasserie (2) State Liability Successful
Francovich Non-Compliance Principle Adds manifestly and gravely disregard limits of discretion
Francovich Sufficiently Serious Principles Clear and Precise, Authority Discretion, Intentional, Excusable, Contribution by EU
Hedley Lomas {UK export Spain Live Animals, Sufficiently Serious}
British Telecommunications Bona Fide, Good Faith breach never sufficiently serious
Ogieriahki v MJELR {Nigerian, Ireland, SL Remedy, NO}
Koebler {Court no CJEU application, not manifest breach but possible}
Marshall v Southampton Damages {Statutory Cap inconsistent with EU effectiveness}
Levez v TH Jennings Remedy must be equivalent
A340 TFEU Non-Contractual Liability of EU
A340 Criteria Intended to confer rights, sufficiently serious, causal link
A263 Judicial Review
A263 Criteria Reviewable, Standing, Grounds, 2 Months
Reviewable Legislative intended to produce legal effects
IBM v Commission {Letter, Opening Investigation, Preliminary, Not Reviewable}
Privileged Applicant MS, Commission, Parliament, Council
Quasi-Privileged Applicant Dispute touches on prerogatives
Non-Privileged Applicant Addressed to person, Direct and Individual Concern,
Direct Concern Clear line between adoption and effect
NV International Fruit Company {Apple License outside EU, no MS Discretion, Direct Concern}
Differdange {Steel Subsidies, MS discretion set level, cannot litigate, intervening step}
Plaumann {Clementine, Customs Duty}
Plaumann Test Certain peculiar attributes, differentiated from all others by virtue of these factors
Piraiki-Patraiki Greece, Cotton Import, Open Category, No Individual Concern
Piraiki Exception Pre-Existing Contracts
Greenpeace {Power Plants, Canary Islands, Impact Assesment, No Individual Concern}
Court Concerns Standing Wording of Treaties, Floodgates
UPA v Council {Olive Oil, small producers, regulations damage interests}
AG Jacobs UPA Test Liable to have a substantial adverse effect on his interests
Jégo-Quere {Hake, Increased Hole Net Size}
Jégo General Court Test Definite and Immediate Effect
CJEU Arguments Keep Plaumann 267 Adequate, National Courts ensure access, MS to amend treaty
AG Jacobs Counter Plaumann 267 Serious Shortcomings, National Autonomy Infringed, No Barrier to Reinterpretation
Lisbon New Standing Regulatory Act of Direct Concern and does not entail implementing measures
Inuit v EP Only applies to things not legislative, failed
Non-Legislative New Lisbon Standing Delegated Legislation
Grounds for Judicial Review Lack of Competence, Infringement of procedural requirement, Infringement of Treaty, Rule of Law, Misuse of Powers
Rule of Law Grounds for Judicial Review Proportionality, Legitimate Expectations, Fundamental Rights, Non-Discrimination
Inuit v Commission No.2 Failed to establish ground for JR, does not apply to mere commercial interests
Mulder {Milk, Gave Up Scheme, Legitimate Expectation, Voluntary Co-Operation}
A267 TFEU Preliminary Ruling Procedure
May Request 267 Court Considers Necessary to Deliver Judgment
Must Request 267 No possibility of Appeal
MJELR v O'Connor {Brexit, EU Arrest}
Broekmeulen {Dutch General Medicine Appeal, Court}
Broekmeulen Factors Adversarial. Representation, Ruling Final, Independent, Rule of Law, Inter Partes
Belov Bulgarian Commission on Discrimination rejected, non-judicial
Da Costa Court may give Order of the Court where identical facts
Order of the Court Concise Statement of Current Law
CILFIT National courts have latitude in non-identical circumstances to interpret EU Law
Acte-Clair Doctrine No reasonable doubt as to application of law
Guza Different Language Versions can lead to different outcomes, must be considered in acte clair
Firma Foto-Frost National Courts cannot disapply EU Legislation
Novello CJEU will reject artificial disputes {Wine}
Meilicke {Professor, contrived}
Bio Phillipe {Likely fictitious, not inconceivable need interpretation}
Created by: 2022569327989305
Popular Law sets




Use these flashcards to help memorize information. Look at the large card and try to recall what is on the other side. Then click the card to flip it. If you knew the answer, click the green Know box. Otherwise, click the red Don't know box.

When you've placed seven or more cards in the Don't know box, click "retry" to try those cards again.

If you've accidentally put the card in the wrong box, just click on the card to take it out of the box.

You can also use your keyboard to move the cards as follows:

If you are logged in to your account, this website will remember which cards you know and don't know so that they are in the same box the next time you log in.

When you need a break, try one of the other activities listed below the flashcards like Matching, Snowman, or Hungry Bug. Although it may feel like you're playing a game, your brain is still making more connections with the information to help you out.

To see how well you know the information, try the Quiz or Test activity.

Pass complete!
"Know" box contains:
Time elapsed:
restart all cards