Development of Judicial Control of the European Communities

The development of the judicial control of the European Communities is perhaps best illustrated by comparing the first decision the Court of Justice rendered in December 1954, under the ECSC Treaty, with its preliminary rulings van Gend & Loos (1962), ENEL (1964) and Simmenthal II (1978) rendere...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Bebr, Gerhard
Format: eBook
Language:English
Published: Dordrecht Springer Netherlands 1981, 1981
Edition:1st ed. 1981
Subjects:
Online Access:
Collection: Springer Book Archives -2004 - Collection details see MPG.ReNa
LEADER 03745nmm a2200289 u 4500
001 EB000719665
003 EBX01000000000000000572747
005 00000000000000.0
007 cr|||||||||||||||||||||
008 140122 ||| eng
020 |a 9789401190190 
100 1 |a Bebr, Gerhard 
245 0 0 |a Development of Judicial Control of the European Communities  |h Elektronische Ressource  |c by Gerhard Bebr 
250 |a 1st ed. 1981 
260 |a Dordrecht  |b Springer Netherlands  |c 1981, 1981 
300 |a 822 p  |b online resource 
505 0 |a One: The Court of Justice and the Community Legal Order -- 1. The Nature and Jurisdiction of the Court of Justice -- Two: Direct Judicial Control -- A. Review of Legality of Community Acts -- 2. Action for Annulment -- 3. Action for Default -- 4. Plea of an Exception of Illegality -- 5. Action for Damages -- B. Action for Infringement of Community Law -- 6. Infringement Procedure against a Defaulting Member State -- 7. Infringement Procedure against Defaulting Private Parties -- C. Constitutional Control -- 8. Preventive Judicial Control -- Three: Indirect Judicial Control: Community Law Before National Courts -- 9. General Problems of the EEC Treaty Article -- 10. Uniform Interpretation of Community Law -- 11. Review of Validity of Community Acts -- 12. EEC Treaty Article 177 in the Practice of National Courts -- 13. Provisions Directly Effective: Additional Judicial Protection of Individuals -- 14. Supremacy of Community Law -- 15. Supremacy of Community Law in the Practice of the National Courts of the Member States -- 1. Documents and Publications of the European Communities -- 2. General Works -- 3. Articles -- 4. Table of Cases Cited and Annotated -- A. Jurisprudence of the Court of Justice -- B. Case Law of National Courts -- 5. Legal Documentation 
653 |a Public International Law 
653 |a Private International Law, International & Foreign Law, Comparative Law 
653 |a Conflict of laws 
653 |a Public international law 
653 |a Private international law 
041 0 7 |a eng  |2 ISO 639-2 
989 |b SBA  |a Springer Book Archives -2004 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-9019-0?nosfx=y  |x Verlag  |3 Volltext 
082 0 |a 341 
520 |a The development of the judicial control of the European Communities is perhaps best illustrated by comparing the first decision the Court of Justice rendered in December 1954, under the ECSC Treaty, with its preliminary rulings van Gend & Loos (1962), ENEL (1964) and Simmenthal II (1978) rendered under the EEC Treaty. In the first case the Court quashed a decision of the High Authority impugned by an annulment action of a Member State for an illegal exercise of Community powers - a judicial control which at the time already represented a spectacular legal in­ novation introduced by the ECSC Treaty. At that time the Court was, for evident reasons, still reserved as to its role within the unprecedented institutional structure of the Community. In van Gend, ENEL and Simmenthal II, on the other hand, the Court resolutely pursued a judicial policy intended to ensure an effective operation of the Community legal order, a problem hardly envisaged in 1954. In these rulings the Court characterized the emerging legal order and stated its fundamental and indispensable requirements: the unlimited supremacy of Community law and its direct effect. The development of a superior and autonomous Community legal order was finally completed by the Court's recognition of fundamental Communiry rights of individuals. This development from an initially reserved stand of the Court searching for its proper role and its potentialities to a bold and determined judicial policy is truly remarkable