The subsidiarity principal in the European Union

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.

European Law is very complex law , within EU law there is various different treaties which are in place. Two most significant treaties which have importance to the legislative process are The Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union.

‘The jurisprudence of the Courts of Justice of the European Communities has, of course, established that the law of the communities, whether embodied in regulations or directives, must be given primacy, where it is applicable, over the domestic law of the member States.’ …‘

This essay will review the difference types of competences and examine the effectiveness of the European Court of Justice in ensuring that EU institutions do not exceed the bounds of their competence in adopting legislation.

This Essay will inspect the relationship between the EU and the UK including purposes behind the supremacy of the European Union (EU) laws and after that it will take a gander at the system of how does the UK offers impact to those laws and regardless of whether the UK parliamentary sovereignty represents an issue to this. The exposition will set up regardless of whether the EU law is without a doubt supreme and in the event that this is along these lines, on what premise is the EU law incomparable as there is no composed report, for example, treaties that expressly states EU law is incomparable however seemingly through standard international laws it might be questionable that the EU is supreme.

This paper will assess the claim that supremacy of EU law is still an evolving and debatable concept. To do this, I have divided this paper into four sections. The first section will discuss the establishment of supremacy in EU law through ECJ case law. The second section will explore the vibrant debate surrounding constitutional pluralism that has arisen since the early 1990s. The third section will examine the debate and impact of the codification of primacy in the early 2000s. The fourth section will examine the extent to which the principle of sovereignty has been accepted in three EU Member States, namely, the United Kingdom, Germany, and Poland.

Enforcing the European Union legal system is diverse and done on multiple platforms; through not only actions taken against member states for breach of their obligations, but also, for example, through the use of direct effect1. Article 267 TFEU; an organism devised to practice private enforcement of EU law before national courts, has been critical to ensure uniform interpretation and application of EU law in member states. References for preliminary rulings occur when the national courts are presented with a question of EU law due to uncertainty of the provision. The national court will therefore ‘make a reference to the Court of Justice (COJ) to obtain a preliminary ruling on any point of EU law relevant to the proceedings’2. In

One of the central themes of the EU debate revolves around the issue of national sovereignty. The European project has always involved, to a certain extent, the relinquishing of some national sovereignty, but in trying to persuade Europe’s established nations to cede powers to a European centre, often without the consultation of the general public, has created a growing eurosceptic backlash, a narrative that has been well received in Britain.

The doctrines of direct effect and supremacy are extremely important because they require national courts to apply European Union law over any conflicting provision of national law. This essay will first consider the doctrine of direct effect, its advantages and disadvantages and it will go on examining the doctrine of supremacy, how it can be assessed and its relation with the doctrine of direct effect. Finally, some conclusion will be drawn as to how the direct effect and supremacy of Union law provisions are related to each other and how can be really helpful for individuals and member states when looking at the big picture, even if in some situations they might be seen as inappropriate.

Articles 3,4 and 6 of the TFEU provides the areas where European Union have exclusive competences, shared and supporting competences respectively and the Union shall act only within the

1) William Phelan (2011): WHY DO THE EU MEMBER STATES ACCEPT THE SUPREMACY OF EUROPEAN LAW? EXPLAINING SUPREMACY AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO BILATERAL RECIPROCITY, Journal of European Public Policy, 18:5, 766-777

At the Laeken European Council of December 2001, government and state leaders of the European Union (EU) Member States decided to draft a `Constitutional Treaty' for the EU. The draft would then be discussed, amended, approved or rejected by an Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) held in 2003. The aim of Fabbrini's article is thus to contribute to the understanding of the constitutional evolution of the EU through a comparison with the constitutional experience of the United States.

The doctrine of direct effect is the primary tool by which the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) enforces European Union (EU) law within member-states. However, the power of direct effect as a tool of enforcement means that the CJEU has had to resist impulses to overextend its application. This essay will argue that rather than unnecessarily undermining the doctrine of direct effect, the CJEU has skilfully managed to create an effective enforcement regime for directives while applying consistent principles in regards to respecting the purpose and function of directives, keeping EU directives and regulations distinct, and crafting new methods of achieving the aim of directives.

In the course of fifty years, the European Union has expanded from six countries united under economic treaties to a large collective of twenty-five sovereign nations. Maintaining the union within such a large group has grown more difficult as numerous treaties have been drafted to control the governance of the European Union. To reduce the number of treaties in the union, the convention decided to draft a Constitution, which now moves through the process of ratification in each of the sovereign nations. The Constitution works to set up a basis for the expansion of the Union and the requirements that need to be met when a country seeks entry into the Union. But with the greater controls the EU seeks to place on the

The European Union (EU) was established in order to prevent the horrors of modern warfare, experienced by most of Europe during the World Wars of the 20th century, from ever ensuing again, by aiming to create an environment of trust with the countries of Europe cooperating in areas such as commerce, research and trade (Adams, 2001). The EU has evolved into an economic, trade, political and monetary alliance between twenty-eight European Member States. While not all Member States are in monetary union (i.e. share the currency of the euro), those that are form the ‘Euro-zone’ (Dinan, 2006). The EU can pass a number of types of legislation, with a regulation, act, or law, being the most powerful. Its ‘tricameral’ (European Union, 2007)