Talk:Indirect effect

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject European Union (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject European Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the European Union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Indirect effect is not as rigid as the original author implies - it does not override domestive law, it simply places an burden upon domestic courts to interpret statutes in line with the directive. Certainly, where there is a direct conflict between EC Law and domestic law, EC law is supreme - the supremacy principle - however this principle has its roots in direct effect. Supremacy is only an issue when a measure is directly effective - this is because it is the claimant who will be relying on the EC law. In the case of directives the claimant cannot rely on the directive being able to override domestic law since the claimant will not be able to resort to the directive to further their case.

Supremacy - which does override domestic law - is a consequence of direct effect.

Also - the seciton on IE and individuals should perhaps relate how IE is a solution to the problem faced by directives and HDE. The text in the article would be better placed in the direct effect article. --Heatley 18:45, Aug 22, 2004 (UTC)


I Edited the introduction to make it in line with what I belive to be the core of indirect effect. Will.S 20:23 11.03.06 2006

I totally agree. This article has got indirect effect completely arse-ways. Ratti has nothing to do indirect effect. But why didn't either of you change the article when it was so obviously wrong?? — Blue-Haired Lawyer t 14:19, 3 September 2011 (UTC)