The Long Term Employment Act 2013

3997 Words16 Pages
• The claimant is in perusal of gaining compensation she believes to be rightfully owed, due to work related injuries caused at their place of employment, at the University of Northern Ireland, when a box of exam papers fell on top of the claimant.

• Directive 444 cites that individuals ‘must’ be compensated, as a long term employee, which the Directive defines as working more than 4 years with the current employer, for any and all reasonable injury related medical expenses for at least one year following the date of their injury. This provision would mean that the client is entitled to at least £2,400 up until May 2015, as their current medical expenses per month are £200 for medication and physiotherapy.

• Under UK
…show more content…
• The EU is an autonomous legal order, and its survival is dependent on the principle of supremacy. An effective, coherent system is essential for uniformity. The principle cites that when national and EU conflicts, EU law is supreme.
Direct Effect
A cause of action the claimant could use to exercise their rights could be direct effect. Direct effect is noted to have two interpretations, broad and narrow. The former states that it is a capacity of a provision of European law which can be invoked before national courts. The latter cites it to be a capacity of a provision of EU law which sees it confer rights unto individuals. [1] The first and leading case in which the doctrine of direct effect was established is Case 26/62 Van Gend en Loos. [2] It is possible the claimant could firmly rely on direct effect of this non-directly applicable form of EU law, outside regulations and treaty articles, as confirmed by Case 9/70 Grad, [3][4] and further confirmed in Case 41/74 Van Duyn v Home Office [5] which cited that directives could give rise to direct effect, providing they satisfied a certain criteria. The initial criteria directives had fulfil so to have direct effect were established in the Case 26/62Van Gend en
Get Access