LAW OF THE EUROPEAN UNION--- Topic: REMEDIES - Assignment Example

Despite its effectiveness, the Court found out that Article 12 of the EC only provided narrow, individual leaves. In 1974, the condition that the provision must have a negative exclusion was left out in Reyners v Belgian State C 2/74 (1974). Two years later, the condition that provision has to be adequately concise and unequivocal was also left out in Defrenne v Sabena (No 2) C-43/75 (1976). In De Frenne, Courts encountered difficulty in trying to interpret equal pay for same work provision under Article 119 EC.

The rules effectively tailored the direct effect of the EU law on the issues facing the EC in a way that was in tandem with the true intention of the drafters. The Von Colson Principle issued in 1986 spawned the doctrine of indirect impact of the EU Directives on the Member States. In this case, two female who had been denied placement as social workers on basis of their sex, were considered victims of breach of the Equal Treatment Directive of 1976. The Court did not limit its interpretation to whether the matter brought direct impact on the aggrieved parties; instead it observed that Article 5 of the EC would be violated if Germany relied on its national laws limiting the parties’ entitlements to reliance compensation.

The spirit of indirect effect was later expanded in Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA C- 106/89 (1990) where the ECJ ruled that EU law should be invoked when determining remedies where the state law is unclear or where it is not in line with the EU law. In Duke v GEC Reliance Ltd [1988] HL, however, the House of Lords ruled that s2(4) ECA 1972 does not allow bending of the meaning of an English statutory law to be in line with the EC law where the Directive has no direct impact on the individuals in question.

In Francovich v Italy C-6/90 (1990), the ECJ expanded the effect of the EU law in respect of