Introduction to EU law

Intro to EU law notes
A. Costov

Explanatory note:

- Cases
- Provisions
- Citations/paragraphs
- Important information
- Negative connotation (e.g. prohibition)
- Positive connotation (e.g. permission)
- EXAM

Hope you find my notes helpful. Good luck!

Anna




1

,Intro to EU law notes
A. Costov


Lecture 1: History, Autonomy and Supremacy
DEVELOPMENT OF EU LAW

- Original purpose:
o To ensure peace and well-being  Art. 3(2) TEU
- Means: Integration of socio-economic development (share resources, values and views)
o Neo-functionalism  let’s share resources so we don’t have to fight for them
 Deepening of EU law (Art. 4 TEU)
 Spill-over  successfully integrate one area and go deeper (because of its success
integration spills over other sectors)
o Expansion through MS  territorial expansion
 Widening of the EU
- Nature: 3 forms of co-operation can be recognized in treaties of EU; all 3 work at the same time
o Intergovernmentalism  allows states to cooperate in specific fields while retaining their
sovereignty
 E.g. CFSP
o Supranationalism  majority of cases: supranational approach (where states lost veto power)
 Power is delegated to authority by governments of MS
 E.g. Commission, ECJ
o Federalism  at heart of the integration process
 There is a direct connection between MS and the EU

DEEPENING of EU law

- In the beginning  coal and steel; other areas added with time: energy, workers, social protection, etc.
- Successful integration of one sector  spill over to other sectors
o Neo-functionalism
o From socio-economic to political
- 1952  Coal and Steel Community (ECSC): France, Germany, Italy, Benelux
o Created to integrate one industrial sector
- 1957 – ongoing  Market and Nuclear Energy Integration
o Treaties of Rome: EEC, Euratom
- 1992 – ongoing  Socio-Political aspect (rights)
o Maastricht: 3 communities  EU (merged)
- 2009 – ongoing  Fundamental Rights, Monetary Union
- Variable speed in the integration process  has never been constant
o E.g. 1966-1980 – Eurosclerosis: France refused to fully participate  high unemployment, slow
job creation  no political unanimity between MS
o Luxemburg Accords 1966: De Gaulle boycotted EU because of its supranationalism (the
Commission)  compromise:
 Veto power
 QMV
 Restrain to the Commission
2

,Intro to EU law notes
A. Costov

o Economic crisis 1970
o 2008 – ongoing economic crisis

EU has two purposes:

1. General = peace and well-being
2. Individual = e.g. studying abroad, pursuing individual interests

WIDENING of the EU (MS) Art. 49 TEU

- 1957  6 MS
- 1973  9 MS
- 1981  10 MS
- 1986  12 MS
- 1999  15 MS
- 2004  25 MS
- 2007  27 MS
- 2013  28 MS
- 2017  ?

INTERGOVERNMENTAL SET-UP

- Rome (1957)
- Nice (2001)
- Rome (2005)
o Failure
- Lisbon (2007)
- All are int. treaties but have to be read in the EU way. EU way of reading differs from international

SUPRANATIONAL SET-UP

- SEA 1987 (Single European Act)
o From unanimity to QMV in the Council (int. market)
o About 270 Directives of the 280 adopted in 5 years after the change
o Directives creating and governing internal market
- Legal change in votes  fastened the political process
- Maastricht Treaty 1992
o From EEC to EC (social policy, more intergovernmentalism)
o EU (CFSP & JHA)  intergovernmental
o Council shares legislative powers with EP
- Amsterdam 1997
o More QMV and more co-decision
- Rome 2005
- Lisbon 2007
o TEU and TFEU (more QMV and co-decision)
o CFSP still intergovernmental
o Charter of Fundamental Rights
3

, Intro to EU law notes
A. Costov

o Steady increase of supranational character

NATURE OF EU LAW

New legal order with special characteristics: autonomous and supreme

- AUTONOMY (Van Gend en Loos)
o EU itself decides on its applicability in national orders (11-19)
o Court of Justice asked to clarify what is the legal order, meaning of the treaties and the nature of the
EC
o Should we (states, here  NL) use national or EU law?
o ECJ: EU is an autonomous legal order and decides how it creates and affects national legal orders
of the MS by itself = power to decide how to influence national legal orders
o EU decides how to create rights and obligations
 Monist approach: international law automatically incorporated into national system
 Dualist approach: international law is transposed into national system as national law
o BUT: independently of MS’ approaches to int. law, EU is an autonomous legal order and decides
how it is going to create rights and obligations by itself
- SUPREMACY (Costa/ENEL)
o Precedence of EU law over conflicting national law (12-19)
o National courts: lex posterior derogate legi anteriori BUT!
o EU law prevails regardless the time when national law was enacted
- National Identity:
o Article 3(2) TEU, Article 4(2) TEU
o Compatible with supranationalism because was created by the supranational power: supreme EU
law orders us to respect national identity

2 PERSPECTIVES on the question of SUPREMACY

- EU perspective:
o All Union laws prevail over all national laws all the time
- National perspective:
o Some national law is considered to be beyond the supremacy of the EU ; expressed in 2 contexts:
 EU law cannot violate national fundamental rights
 MS insists they have the last word regarding the competences of the Union (=deny Union’s
unlimited competences)
- Because of the nature of EU law, MS introduced institutional principles




4