EU Law: Direct Effect and Applicability

A regulation that directly applies to individuals and is directly enforceable in national courts.

A rule stating that regulations can be used as a legal basis for claims between private parties.

A decision binding on the parties to whom it is addressed. Individuals cannot rely on its direct effect in court.

The inability of individuals to directly enforce directives in national courts because they require Member States to implement them into their national laws.

A mechanism used when a Member State fails to fulfill its obligation to transpose a directive into its national legal system. This procedure is insufficient to protect individuals who could have benefited from the directive.

Directives can create legal rights for individuals to enforce against a Member State if the Member State fails to implement the directive correctly or on time.

The ECJ created this principle to ensure that individuals are not disadvantaged by a Member State's failure to implement a directive.

Directives are only enforceable against the Member State, not against other individuals or private entities.

Directives never have horizontal effect, meaning individuals cannot sue each other based on a directive.

For a directive to have direct effect, the deadline for transposition must have passed, and the Member State must have failed to implement it correctly or at all.

The individual seeking to rely on a directive must be suing a Member State, not another individual or entity.

The specific provision of the directive must be clear, precise, unconditional, and intended to confer rights on individuals.

Before the deadline for transposition, a directive does not create direct effect but instead imposes a 'standstill' obligation on Member States, requiring them to refrain from taking any action that would hinder its implementation.

A legal concept referring to the ability of EU law to produce legal effects within the national legal orders of Member States without the need for national implementation.

A legal concept referring to the ability of individuals to rely on EU law provisions before national courts, even if they have not been implemented at the national level.

A type of direct effect where individuals can invoke EU law provisions before national courts against Member States.

A type of direct effect where Member States can invoke EU law provisions before national courts against individuals.

A type of direct effect where individuals can invoke EU law provisions before national courts against other individuals.

The European Court of Justice's landmark case that established the principle of direct effect.

The principle that the EU legal order is distinct from ordinary international law and recognizes individuals as legal subjects.

The recognition of individuals as legal subjects within the EU legal order.

The theory that individuals can rely on EU law provisions due to the obligations assumed by Member States.

The infringement procedure, while important, may not be sufficient to adequately protect individual's rights.

Directives can be used by individuals to challenge the actions of a Member State that has not properly implemented the directive.

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) recognized that a lack of horizontal direct effect can create a two-tiered system of protection, disadvantaging individuals in private disputes.

The ECJ acknowledges that a lack of horizontal direct effect of directives can cause legal issues and is seeking solutions.

The ECJ has explored ways to broaden the concept of "state" to include entities involved in public functions, potentially expanding the vertical direct effect of directives.

A legal principle that allows individuals to directly enforce directives against a Member State, but not against other individuals or private entities.

A legal principle that prohibits individuals from using directives to sue each other, even if the Member State failed to implement the directive.

The concept of

Directives, even if not yet transposed, can have direct effect if they express a general principle of EU law.

The extent to which a rule applies to a particular situation, taking into account the objectives and purpose of the rule.

When the deadline for transposition has passed, and the Member State fails to implement the directive correctly or at all.

The individual seeking to rely on a directive must be suing a Member State, not another individual or entity, to be successful.

When a directive (EU law requiring implementation by Member States) cannot be used by individuals against other individuals in court.

The principle that EU law, particularly directives, can be invoked against Member States in national courts if they fail to properly implement the directive.

In this landmark case, the ECJ ruled that individuals cannot invoke a non-transposed directive against other individuals in court. This means that private parties cannot rely on a directive unless it has been implemented by the Member State.

The ECJ's justification for not allowing horizontal direct effect of directives. Non-transposed directives could create legal uncertainty, as individuals would be expected to know and comply with rules that have not been implemented by their own governments.

The argument that directives cannot be used horizontally because they are meant for Member States to implement, not to create new rights between individuals.

A legal principle that requires EU law to be applied equally to all individuals, regardless of whether they are citizens of the same or different Member States.

The ECJ's argument in Faccini Dori regarding the potential for non-transposed directives to create a situation where directives act as regulations with delayed effect, violating the principle of attribution of powers between the EU and Member States.