10. The Relationship Between EU Law and National Law: Supremacy

IF 0.3 Q3 LAW China-EU Law Journal Pub Date : 2020-07-21 DOI:10.1093/he/9780199576999.003.0009
P. Craig, G. Búrca
{"title":"10. The Relationship Between EU Law and National Law: Supremacy","authors":"P. Craig, G. Búrca","doi":"10.1093/he/9780199576999.003.0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter discusses the doctrine of supremacy of EU law, which was developed by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) based on its conception of the ‘new legal order’. The ECJ ruled that the aim of creating a uniform common market between different states would be undermined if EU law could be made subordinate to national law of the various states. The validity of EU law can therefore, according to the ECJ, never be assessed by reference to national law. National courts are required to give immediate effect to EU law, of whatever rank, in cases that arise before them, and to ignore or to set aside any national law, of whatever rank, which could impede the application of EU law. Thus, according to the ECJ, any norm of EU law takes precedence over any provision of national law, including the national constitutions. This broad assertion of the supremacy of EU law has not however been accepted without qualification by national courts, and the chapter examines the nature of the qualifications that have been imposed by some national courts. The UK version contains a further section analysing the relevance of the supremacy of EU law in relation to the UK post-Brexit.","PeriodicalId":29853,"journal":{"name":"China-EU Law Journal","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"China-EU Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780199576999.003.0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter discusses the doctrine of supremacy of EU law, which was developed by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) based on its conception of the ‘new legal order’. The ECJ ruled that the aim of creating a uniform common market between different states would be undermined if EU law could be made subordinate to national law of the various states. The validity of EU law can therefore, according to the ECJ, never be assessed by reference to national law. National courts are required to give immediate effect to EU law, of whatever rank, in cases that arise before them, and to ignore or to set aside any national law, of whatever rank, which could impede the application of EU law. Thus, according to the ECJ, any norm of EU law takes precedence over any provision of national law, including the national constitutions. This broad assertion of the supremacy of EU law has not however been accepted without qualification by national courts, and the chapter examines the nature of the qualifications that have been imposed by some national courts. The UK version contains a further section analysing the relevance of the supremacy of EU law in relation to the UK post-Brexit.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
10. 欧盟法与国内法的关系:至上主义
所有的书在这个旗舰系列包含精心挑选的关键案例,立法和学术辩论的实质性摘录,为学生提供一个独立的资源。本章讨论了欧盟法律至上的原则,这是由欧洲法院(ECJ)基于其“新法律秩序”的概念发展起来的。欧洲法院裁定,如果欧盟法律从属于各国的国内法,那么在不同国家之间建立一个统一的共同市场的目标就会受到破坏。因此,根据欧洲法院的说法,欧盟法律的有效性永远不能通过参考国内法来评估。国家法院被要求在其审理的案件中立即执行欧盟法律,无论其级别如何,并且无视或搁置任何可能阻碍欧盟法律适用的国家法律,无论其级别如何。因此,根据欧洲法院的说法,欧盟法律的任何规范优先于国家法律的任何规定,包括国家宪法。然而,这种对欧盟法律至上的广泛主张并没有被国家法院无条件地接受,本章考察了一些国家法院施加的条件的性质。英国版本包含进一步的部分,分析欧盟法律至上与英国脱欧后的相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
期刊最新文献
Principles of EU law in climate litigation Climate adaptation law: a European perspective Correction: The evaluation of innovation in merger control: a comparison between China and other jurisdictions Special issue on competition law The evaluation of innovation in merger control: a comparison between china and other jurisdictions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1