- This topic has 6 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 6 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
‘The ECJ does not create or follow precedents, and the provisions of EU directives should not be used to interpret UK legislation.’
Sir could you please explain the phrase above?
What is meant by provisions in EU directives? Shouldnt the interpretation always be compatible with the Europeon convention on Human Rights?
The word “provisions” is not used here in an accounting sense
The expression is simply saying that whatever is written in EU Directives is not taken to be binding on UK law
For the next few months (until 31 January, 2020) the UK is bound by EU legislation in so far as the UK cannot pass (nor interpret) law that is in conflict with European law
Does that answer you?
No sir, The book says two things im confused
One says ‘the court must refuse to apply an act that contravenes EU law’
‘Provisions of EU directives should not be used to interpret UK law’
An EU Directive is simply (!) an instruction from Europe that all member states shall either change existing law or create new law (where one didn’t previously exist) to enact legislation decided upon by the community
Until that domestic law is changed (or created, as applicable) the Directive itself is not to be taken as being the creation itself of new, binding legislation
Better?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.