header-logo header-logo

European law

08 July 2010
Issue: 7425 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

R v Budimir and Rainbird (Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport intervening) [2010] EWCA Crim 1486, [2010] All ER (D) 269 (Jun). Interfact Ltd v Liverpool City Council [2010] EWHC 1604 (Admin)

In the decentralised system of the EU legal order, rights of individuals under EU law were given effect principally through national courts. In the absence of EU rules on the subject, EU law left to the domestic legal system of each member state the designation of the courts having jurisdiction and the rules governing proceedings intended to secure rights conferred by EU law.

However, national law was not given an entirely free hand in such matters. The applicable national rules would have to comply with two conditions. First, they would have to not be less favourable than those governing similar domestic actions (the principle of equivalence). Secondly, they would have to not render the exercise of rights conferred by Community law impossible or excessively difficult.

The principle of effectiveness resulted directly from the application of the principles of supremacy and direct effect in

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll