Does Europe have too much say on the English Law?
The question that is going to be answered in this debate is, does Europe have too much say
on English law. By answering this this question we will be looking at different people’s views
and opinions, cases and Brexit.
Parliament is sovereign as it takes priority over conflicting laws and has full power.
Parliament can also create or end any law at any time. Parliamentary sovereignty is the
important part of the UK constitution. However, in the past, Parliament has passed laws
which have affected sovereignty of Parliament. An Example such as the UK’s entry to the
European Union in 1973. The UK then signs several treaties related to the EU. The first one
in 1991 which was the Maastricht treaty on European Union is signed in December, the UK
negotiated to opt out of the social policy and the monetary union. European Union allowed
countries to opt in and out of a policy in a treaty. The UKs entry into the EU and the treaties
we sign affect our sovereignty, before we joined the EU all laws affecting the people of this
country were made by their own directly elected Parliament. This is not the case anymore.
Wades says constitutional revolution where Parliamentary sovereignty has been ceded to
European courts.
Wades view on Parliamentary sovereignty is not simply suspended for as long as the UK
remains member of the EU, but that Parliamentary sovereignty has been extinguished.
Although if Brexit could reignite the notion of sovereignty. On the other hand, Laws LJ
believes Parliament cannot abandon sovereignty. His decision in Thoburn cases v
Sunderland City Council, has interpreted the Factortame judgement in another light Far from
destroying parliamentary supremacy, Laws LJ sees the judgment as preserving the power
Parliament to expressly repeal the 1972 Act.
A case that brought up issues of sovereignty is Van Gend En Loos (1963) the facts of the
case were, Van Gend En Loos imported a type of plastic from Germany into the
Netherlands. Upon arrival, Dutch customs authorities demanded a type of import tax to be
paid. The issues with the case was, could Van Gend En Loos rely on EU law in order to
refuse to pay the import tax? The decision was yes, the Dutch customs authorities were in
violation of what is now Art 30 TFEU:
“Member States shall refrain from introducing between themselves any new customs duties
on imports and exports or any charges having equivalent effect, and from increasing those
which they already apply in their trade with each other”.
The Dutch Government argued that the European Court of Justice had no authority to decide
whether European law triumphs over Dutch law; that matter was for the Dutch courts to
decide. However, this argument was rejected by the European courts. In the case Costa v
ENAL (1964) European court of Justice announced that even if there was a later national law
it did not take precedence over European law, in this case the European Court of Justice
said:
‘The Member States have limited their sovereign rights, albeit within limited fields, and have
thus created a body of law which binds both their nationals and them selves’. This conflict
was clearly showed in the case explained earlier on in the debate, Factortame case (1990)
The case Factortame, UK law was challenged, raising issues of Parliamentary sovereignty.
Where the claimants which were ship-owners that made use of UK fish reserves to fish
courtesy of the merchant shipping Act 1894, this Act allowed them to fish in the UK then sell
what they had caught in Spain. The secretary of state for transport changed the Merchant
shipping Act to become the Merchant Act 1988. Which lead to preventing the Spanish ship
The question that is going to be answered in this debate is, does Europe have too much say
on English law. By answering this this question we will be looking at different people’s views
and opinions, cases and Brexit.
Parliament is sovereign as it takes priority over conflicting laws and has full power.
Parliament can also create or end any law at any time. Parliamentary sovereignty is the
important part of the UK constitution. However, in the past, Parliament has passed laws
which have affected sovereignty of Parliament. An Example such as the UK’s entry to the
European Union in 1973. The UK then signs several treaties related to the EU. The first one
in 1991 which was the Maastricht treaty on European Union is signed in December, the UK
negotiated to opt out of the social policy and the monetary union. European Union allowed
countries to opt in and out of a policy in a treaty. The UKs entry into the EU and the treaties
we sign affect our sovereignty, before we joined the EU all laws affecting the people of this
country were made by their own directly elected Parliament. This is not the case anymore.
Wades says constitutional revolution where Parliamentary sovereignty has been ceded to
European courts.
Wades view on Parliamentary sovereignty is not simply suspended for as long as the UK
remains member of the EU, but that Parliamentary sovereignty has been extinguished.
Although if Brexit could reignite the notion of sovereignty. On the other hand, Laws LJ
believes Parliament cannot abandon sovereignty. His decision in Thoburn cases v
Sunderland City Council, has interpreted the Factortame judgement in another light Far from
destroying parliamentary supremacy, Laws LJ sees the judgment as preserving the power
Parliament to expressly repeal the 1972 Act.
A case that brought up issues of sovereignty is Van Gend En Loos (1963) the facts of the
case were, Van Gend En Loos imported a type of plastic from Germany into the
Netherlands. Upon arrival, Dutch customs authorities demanded a type of import tax to be
paid. The issues with the case was, could Van Gend En Loos rely on EU law in order to
refuse to pay the import tax? The decision was yes, the Dutch customs authorities were in
violation of what is now Art 30 TFEU:
“Member States shall refrain from introducing between themselves any new customs duties
on imports and exports or any charges having equivalent effect, and from increasing those
which they already apply in their trade with each other”.
The Dutch Government argued that the European Court of Justice had no authority to decide
whether European law triumphs over Dutch law; that matter was for the Dutch courts to
decide. However, this argument was rejected by the European courts. In the case Costa v
ENAL (1964) European court of Justice announced that even if there was a later national law
it did not take precedence over European law, in this case the European Court of Justice
said:
‘The Member States have limited their sovereign rights, albeit within limited fields, and have
thus created a body of law which binds both their nationals and them selves’. This conflict
was clearly showed in the case explained earlier on in the debate, Factortame case (1990)
The case Factortame, UK law was challenged, raising issues of Parliamentary sovereignty.
Where the claimants which were ship-owners that made use of UK fish reserves to fish
courtesy of the merchant shipping Act 1894, this Act allowed them to fish in the UK then sell
what they had caught in Spain. The secretary of state for transport changed the Merchant
shipping Act to become the Merchant Act 1988. Which lead to preventing the Spanish ship
