Implementation of EU Law through Domestic Measures after Fransson: The Court of Justice Buys Time and 'Non-Preclusion' Troubles Loom Large

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

In 2014, the Court came to terms with the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights to domestic measures in the wake of Fransson. The five cases discussed here provide an overview of the Court's subsequent interpretation of the "implementation" link between EU law and national measures, required for the Charter to apply. Arguably, the Court is playing by ear and eludes the real legal riddle: how to determine with certainty the application of EU law at large in a specific case. Because the application of the Charter depends on the application of EU law, this issue deserves more attention. In particular, the precise notion of the application of EU law could help to identify non-preclusion cases, i.e. those in which EU law applies to, but does not prohibit, domestic measures. Only in these cases does the Charter have added value as an autonomous standard of review.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)782-800
JournalEuropean Law Review
Volume39
Issue number5
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Keywords

  • Charter of Fundamental Rights
  • Article 51
  • Member States
  • human rights
  • Fransson
  • Siragusa
  • Pfleger
  • Torralbo
  • non-precluded measures

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Implementation of EU Law through Domestic Measures after Fransson: The Court of Justice Buys Time and 'Non-Preclusion' Troubles Loom Large'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this