The crux of the discussion of the essay is to determine whether the principles of direct effect, supremacy and member state liability are capable of protecting individuals’ rights. Direct effect is a directly effective provision that a natural or legal person can rely on in national courts. Supremacy is where a provision on national and EU law are in conflict, the latter will prevail. Member state liability is that the individuals can seek for compensation from the State when there is a failure on the State’s part to implement the EU Law.
The internal market is one that seeks to guarantee a free movement of goods, services, capital, and people between the European Union (EU) member states. The free movement of persons has become one of the fundamental freedoms guaranteed under Article 26 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The right to this freedom can only be exercised by working EU citizens. Article 20 of the TFEU and Article 2 of Directive 2004/38 defines who would be considered an EU citizen. Article 20 states that “every person holding the nationality of a Member State shall be a citizen of the Union,” while article 2(1) of the Directive 2004/38 refers to an EU citizen as “any person having the nationality of a Member State.” Union citizenship grants individuals the right to move freely and take up employment within other Member States uninterrupted and without discrimination. This right is provided for in Article 18 TFEU which prohibits discrimination based on ones nationality. Union citizens surely have the right to move and reside freely but this right is also subject to ‘conditions and limitation’s’ as stated in Article 21 TFEU. Article 45 of the TFEU provides for the securement of free movement of workers within the Union.
This essay will argue that the concept of ‘worker’ defined under section 230 of the Employment Rights Act (“ERA”) 1996 is board; however, due to the undefined scope of section 230(3) of ERA 1996, employment tribunals and the courts have adapted a rigid approach in their interpretation; that there is a ‘high degree of legal uncertainty’ as established in this area of law; that the law does not adequately deal with non-standard forms of ‘workers’; present proposals for reform by the UK Parliament on the interpretation and application of law at common; and finally provide a conclusion for the arguments put forth.
The purpose of this research is to discover the main challenges facing the EU in the near future, by showing the economic and legal problems that the EU will face. These problems include how migration, bailouts and terrorism affect the EU economy. Furthermore it will look at anti-EU sentiments around Europe, which has appeared to spread across rapidly, due to Euro Crises. Moreover, the Legal problems that the EU will face, such as: the process of obtaining EU citizenship enabling migration and cultural clashes, whilst also looking at the statute that enables free movement of goods and people, resulting in mass immigration and the European Convention on Human Rights. This paper will evaluate EU principles that affect the UK constitution, such as the European Convention on Human Rights, the Costa v ENEL (1964) CMLR 425 case being evidence proving that the EU will face challenges concerning its law being more superior than national law, Van Gend en loos (1963) ECR 1. Where a similar principle was set and the “two-speed Europe”, which, is the idea that different member states should integrate at different levels, as it is believed that the more member states in the EU the harder it is to find a consensus amongst difficult agendas, making the EU law very inconsistent. It will be related it back to the question of ‘what are the main challenges facing the EU in the near future?’
The European Union (EU) is a unique economic and political partnership between 28 different countries. It consists of about half a billion citizens, and its combined economy represents about 20 percent of the world’s total economy (Briney, 2015). Today The European Union works as a single market, with free movement of people, goods and services from one country to another. There is a standard system of laws to be followed, and since 1999 many countries share a single currency called the Euro (Europa.eu, 2015). This essay will explore the background history of the European Union and the benefits and drawbacks of the European Union.
A very important advantage is that Each European Citizen has the right to live, work and study in each member state. Free movement of workers is a fundamental right which permits nationals of one EU Member State to work in another Member State under the same conditions as that Member State’s own citizens. This is an important instrument to make sure people can develop their skills in the best possible way (Winkler, 2008).
EU does is about bringing people in Europe closer together. It tries to make it easier for Europeans to buy and sell things to each other. This is done by changing the rules that control trade. The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, liberty, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. Moreover, the societies of the Member States are characterised by pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men. These values play an important role, especially in two specific cases.
(4) Are Article 119 and the equal pay directive of direct effect in the circumstances of this case?
The development of a human rights policy in the EU has been a long and often undocumented journey. The sectoral approach of the Paris Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) in 1951 had an economic and functional intention, lacking a declaration of fundamental rights, as seen in national constitutions. It was not until the 2000 Nice Summit that the European Union first established a written charter, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, explicitly stating and guaranteeing human rights in the European Union. Documented EU human rights policy before 2000 can be seen primarily in two ways:
The right-to-work laws are rules that are focused on guaranteeing employees right to work with no compulsion to join any worker’s unions. These laws abolish any treaties between the workers’ unions and the employers in relation to the extent which a workers’ union would require a worker to be admitted to the union and pay the union’s fees as a basis for employment. The employee, therefore, decides on their own free will on whether to join a workers’ union or not. The employee is also guaranteed with freedom on making a choice of whether to support the respective union financially or not. Most states in the United States have embraced the adoption of these laws in efforts to safeguard their worker 's integrity in deciding whether to be members of a worker’s unions or not. For instance, the “right to work” law was passed in Michigan on 6th December 2012 after a legislature gave the workers the right to get their union contract benefits with no pay to the unions in terms of union dues or service fees to enhance the daily running of the unions (Leon 1). This law gave the workers the right to decide whether to join any union or not. Moreover, the law gave workers the freedom to assemble and formulate their own organization’s rules and regulations. Consequently, this paper focuses on illustrating how the right-to-work laws affect wages and benefits of the workers in states where the laws have been adopted.
Later, as the European Economic Community changed into the European Community and more recently into the European Union (EU), it has become more and more common for all member states to legislate in order to give effect to employment laws which
With the effect of the Single European Act on 1st July 1987, the emergence of European Union (EU) as a common market has essentially been created. The benefits of this act are substantial to European firms, economies, and workers. It eliminates conflicting national regulations and trade barriers, as well as offering firms opportunity to sell their goods to all other EU members (Griffin & Pustay 2005).
The free movement of workers has been described as “one of the cornerstones of the internal market” and the precise conditions can be identified in Article 45 of the TFEU. The Treaty states that the “freedom of movement of workers shall be secured within the Union” and that the free movement of workers shall abolish “any discrimination based on nationality between workers of the Member States as regards employment, remuneration and other conditions of work and employment.” It also states further rights such as accepting offers of
In the aftermath of the 1957 Treaty , the European Economic Community (EEC) was established and customs barriers between the member states have been abolished. Member States throughout the Community, can “promote a harmonious development of economic activities, a continuous and balanced expansion, an increased stability, an accelerated raising of the standard of living and closer relations between them”. Therefore, in order for a common market to be established between Member States, the Community enacted some legislative provisions which aimed to a true harmonization of laws; incorporate different legal systems under a basic legal framework. The main issue arising is whether these legal provisions in accordance with the case law, ensured the free movement of goods within this market.
One of the main objectives of the European Union (EU) is the establishment of the internal market, which shall consist of “area without internal frontiers in which the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital is ensured. The internal market is based upon a customs union achieved through the abolition of the imposition of customs duties and charges having an equivalent effect and the prohibition of discriminatory taxes on intra-EU imports. The internal market is enhanced by the provisions on free movement of workers, freedom of establishment, free movement of services, and free movement of capital. Whereas Articles 28 to 30 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provide for the establishment of an EU common external tariff and the elimination of customs duties, Articles 34 and 35 of the TFEU (with exceptions under Article 36) go further, and prohibit quantitative restrictions and measures having equivalent effect. Taken together, Articles 28 to 32 and 34 to 36 serve to ensure the free movement of goods within the EU and to facilitate the operation of the internal market.