Abstract
AbstractChapter 4 looks at case law that invoke (with or without success) the Legislative Priority Rule across a range of sectors, including the Common Agricultural Policy, public health and safety, consumer protection, and environmental protection. What emerges is a jurisprudence that oscillates between pre-empting national competence in these fields and authorizing EU compliant regulation, and from imposing the EU standard, to deciding that it does not apply. Far from signalling incoherence or subjectivity, this case law generally reflects the EU legislative acquis, which seeks to both integrate and regulate the internal market for goods. In other words, it is varied exactly because the underlying EU legislation is varied. What is more, the Legislative Priority Rule can provide a framework for the European Court of Justice to interpret and enforce such legislation in a generally coherent and Treaty-compliant way. That said, reliance on the Rule can sometimes engender confusion, inconsistencies, and, in extremis, a risk that certain acts of national (legislation-based) discretion could escape review.
Publisher
Oxford University PressOxford
Reference219 articles.
1. Adinolfi A. ‘The “Procedural Autonomy” of Member States and the Constraints Stemming from the ECJ’s Case Law: Is Judicial Activism Still Necessary’ in H-W Micklitz and B De Witte (eds), The European Court of Justice and the Autonomy of the Member States (Intersentia 2012), 292.
2. The Doctrine of Union Preemption in the EU Single Market: Between Sein and Solen;Jean Monnet Working Paper 03/10,2010
3. Le rôle constitutionnel de la Cour de justice des Communautés européennes tel qu’il se dégage de sa jurisprudence,2008
4. The “Retained Powers” Formula in the Case Law of the European Court of Justice: EU Law as Total Law;European Journal of Legal Studies,2011