Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPHELAN, William
dc.date.accessioned2014-09-04T15:35:54Z
dc.date.available2014-09-04T15:35:54Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.identifier.issn1725-6739
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1814/32393
dc.description.abstractAs the ECJ’s two most famous decisions, Van Gend en Loos and Costa v. ENEL, which established the direct effect and supremacy of European law, are commemorated on their fiftieth anniversaries, attention has also turned to another of the ECJ’s early decisions. On 13th November 1964, in Commission v. Luxembourg & Belgium, the Dairy Products case, the ECJ rejected the use of ‘self-help’ countermeasures in the Community legal order, and therefore marked the fundamental distinction between European law and general international law. Drawing on writings by Robert Lecourt, Paul Reuter, and Paul Kapteyn, this paper demonstrates that a direct causal link between these three cases was recognized by ECJ judges and legal scholars as early as 1965. The historical evidence presented here therefore supports previous comparative analysis that has argued that these three decisions – Van Gend, Costa, and Luxembourg & Belgium – should be acknowledged as profoundly inter-connected, in that national court application of European obligations should be understood as a substitute for the enforcement of European obligations through inter-state countermeasures.en
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoenen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesEUI LAWen
dc.relation.ispartofseries2014/11en
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen
dc.subjectHistory of European Lawen
dc.subjectEuropean Lawen
dc.subjectPublic International Lawen
dc.subjectVan Gend en Loosen
dc.subjectCosta v ENELen
dc.subjectCommission v Luxembourg & Belgiumen
dc.titleSupremacy, direct effect, and dairy products in the early history of European lawen
dc.typeWorking Paperen
eui.subscribe.skiptrue


Files associated with this item

Icon

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record