When should Direct Applicability be considered in the exam?
(You'll notice this question on all the quizzes!)
A. After Alternatives to Litigation but before DE, IDE or Francovich
Direct Applicability should be considered in the exam after Alternatives to Litigation but before DE, IDE, or Francovich.
In any event, the case study will always include defective implementation, otherwise the client would just rely on the national law and there would be no EU issue...
Defective ___________ is when the member state either makes laws or declares it's intention to rely on existing national provisions, to give force to the provisions of the EU directive.
The correct answer is "Transposition". Transposition refers to the process of incorporating the provisions of an EU directive into the national legislation of a member state. In this case, the case study includes defective implementation, which means that the member state either makes laws or declares its intention to rely on existing national provisions to give force to the provisions of the EU directive. This shows that the transposition process has been carried out incorrectly or inadequately, leading to defective implementation.
The directive could not be implemented correctly if, in practice it is not applied correctly. What case establishes this?
You should consider whether each provision has been implemented correctly.
A. Marks and Spencer
The case of Marks and Spencer establishes that the directive could not be implemented correctly if it is not applied correctly in practice. This suggests that although Marks and Spencer may have attempted to implement the directive, there were issues or mistakes in the application of the provisions, leading to an incorrect implementation.
EURLEX website, usually towards the back of the directive itself...
What will you find here?
D. The time limit for a directives implementation
The EURLEX website provides information on various aspects related to directives. One of the things you will find on the website is the time limit for the implementation of directives. This information is important as it specifies the deadline by which member states must incorporate the provisions of a directive into their national laws. By having access to this information, users of the website can stay informed about the progress and compliance of member states with EU directives.
If the time limit has not yet expired, then the directive cannot be relied upon for Direct Effect or Damages (Francovich I) claims. According to...?
The correct answer is Ratti. According to the Ratti case, if the time limit for implementing a directive has not yet expired, individuals cannot rely on the directive for direct effect or claim damages. This means that they cannot enforce their rights under the directive against the state or seek compensation for any harm suffered due to the state's failure to implement the directive. Therefore, Ratti supports the explanation provided in the question.
If the time limit has not yet expired, then the directive cannot be relied upon for Indirect Effect (Consistent Interpretation) claims. According to which two of these cases?
The correct answer is Adeneler and Centrosteel. These two cases establish that if the time limit for implementing a directive has not yet expired, it cannot be relied upon for indirect effect claims. This means that individuals cannot use the directive as a basis for challenging national laws or actions that are inconsistent with the directive until the time limit for implementation has passed. Marleasing and Wallonie are not relevant to this issue.
There are exceptions to the time limit rule... But this only applies to... Choose 2 answers
A. Francovich claims
C. Direct Effect claims
The correct answer is Francovich claims and Direct Effect claims. Francovich claims refer to the right of individuals to seek compensation from member states for damages suffered as a result of a violation of EU law. Direct Effect claims refer to the principle that certain provisions of EU law can be directly invoked by individuals in national courts. These exceptions to the time limit rule apply specifically to these two types of claims.
And the exceptions to the time limit rule can are notoriously difficult to establish...
There must be evidence that the Member State has taken its final steps and these seriously compromise to result required from the directive.
The correct answer is Wallonie. In the given statement, it is mentioned that there must be evidence that the Member State has taken its final steps and these seriously compromise the result required from the directive. The case of Wallonie is likely to be the one where there is evidence of a Member State not complying with the required result from the directive, leading to serious consequences.
___________ establishes that retrograde steps in relation to the transposition of the directive amount to seriously compromises the result required by the directive as per Wallonie.
This means that retrograde steps can amount to an exception to the Ratti rule.
The correct answer is Werner-Mangold. Werner-Mangold is a case that establishes that retrograde steps, in relation to the transposition of a directive, can seriously compromise the result required by the directive. This means that retrograde steps can be considered an exception to the Ratti rule.
Please put your comments here :)
And JOIN THE UCLAN LAW SOCIETY NEXT YEAR! :)
Check out my website: www.thelawlife.co.uk, I'll be posting quizzes on all the topics I will be doing in the EU, Tort and Criminal exams on here! (Helps me revise - helps you revise :) )
Good luck with Shazia! :)
Have sent to Shaun hoping he will confirm the content is accurate; if you spot any mistakes before then - let me know and I'll change them... :)