EU law. 1. Curtiz.


content of lecture:

free movement of goods

free movement of persons

free movement of services



EU law.

EU v French influenced

UK later joined

Treaty of Lisbon became much more than it was. No longer just economic

co operation on social ideals

fundamental rights are concerned. EU more like a federal state

UK is holding referendum

What did Cameron win? V little concessions

issues of sovereignty still remain

re negotiations are about internal politics of Conservatives

free movement in EU

restrictions on this.

Public security, public health and public policy

any EU citizen may move to another country for 3 months

if you move you must have enough money, health insurance,

if you are homeless the local authority has a duty to house you in the UK

UK has generous benefits

United Kingdom trying to stop people benefits hunting

France and Germany want unity

UK is more functionalist – want economic gains

Labour and Tories differ on the EU


What would happen if the UK left the European Union.

Sterling has followed 15% in value.

UK would like to join the EFTA.  UK would not be able to set policy



ECSC first effort

Euratom served as a training ground for institutions that became EU agencies

origins of ECJ. THE COUNcil and the commission

with only 6 nations it is easy to get an agreement. it is hard with 28

qualified majority voting was introduced

Single European Act 1986

single market was created. no tariffs. trading goods across boundaries. no discrimination on goods

1992. Maastricht. European Monetary Union

EU was based on three pillars.

since Lisbon the treaties are amalgamated. There is a legal basis for co operation

democratic deficit

Only elected body was parliament which was almost powerless

co decision is no standard since Lisbon. EU Parliament must be part of it

treaty of Nice. 2000. led to charter of fundamental rights – legalised in Lisbon

Libson – EU became something much more than a trade bloc

C F R E U  – covers many areas not covered before by EU.

C F R E U – the safe harbour ruling.

across the EU with the exception of the UK there are laws on privacy

EU syllabus has changed

most of what was in the three pillars is now in substantive law

leading case on supremacy of EU law.

Factortame.  especially from a public law point of view

primary law –

secondary law

tertiary laws –

When UK joined the EEC the politicians did not know what they were letting themselves in for

sovereignty of the British Parliament is paramount

Bulmer v Bollinger case – Lord Denning spoke about incoming tide

metric martyrs case

did UK completely surrender its sovereignty

according to European Communities Act. it is about competences

the EU has competences in some areas

article 2 TFEU – there is exclusive EU competence in some areas. ”Only the Union may leglislate member states being able to do so only by the Union.”

there are also shared competences

this is between the EU and member states

they may legislate and adopt legally binding act in this area.

member states may exercise their competence to the extent that the EU has not

does not seem like complete handover of sovereignty

what about criminal law? Not an EU issue

social charter – is an EU issues

EU always wants more co operation

all member states have agreed to be bound by EU law

this works well with primary law  and secondary law

but there are problems about directives







About Calers

Born Belfast 1971. I read history at Edinburgh. I did a Master's at UCL. I have semi-libertarian right wing opinions. I am married with a daughter and a son. I am allergic to cats. I am the falling hope of the not so stern and somewhat bending Tories. I am a legal beagle rather than and eagle. Big up the Commonwealth of Nations.

3 responses »

  1. Interesting and timely. I took an undergrad class about the EU in about 1990 which left an impression on me. The EU is about union of people and ideas, rather utopian in scope…but that is (for me) a good thing. The concept should be required knowledge throughout the world. I’m not suggesting the EU is perfect, but it is a start. Would that the United States with its disastrous NAFTA creation, would have the same goals….not of domination, but of the free-flow of people and goods. But I am a dreamer who aspires to the Great Future ideas…not naive, but awake. 🙂

    • I am most grateful for this appreciation. The EU is utopian in that it believes it can provide peace and prosperity. It is true that EU states have not gone to war against each other since the EU or its predecessor was founded. This does not demonstrate that pacific relations have been maintained by reason of the existence of the EU. NAFTA is quite different. It is about free trade but there are many exemptions to it. NAFTA does not have a court or seek to impose the same laws on the USA, Canada and Mexico. There is no migration element to it.

      • Yes. NAFTA is very different, the reference I was making is to the free flow of ideas and of people interacting among nations. EU is a good thing as far as I know it now…still in its rules-making stage. The US is carefully exempt from all such as the World Court. NAFTA has hurt Mexican farmers and US businesses…not founded on international cooperation, but on profit making. I am in danger of over-generalizing here, and do not mean to pursue that direction. However, many many do not have any idea of what the EU is or isn’t, and the comment I was making is that your post (and site) are educational and very helpful in spreading knowledge of the efforts being made there.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s