Discuss why Van Gend En Loos (Case 26/62), Von Colson (14/83) and Francovich (Cases 6 & 9/90 have all played their important part in providing avenues which enabled private party applicants to enforce rights given to them by various provisions of EC Law in their national courts.
The ability of private parties to enforce European Community law in national courts is now an essential feature of the integrated legal system set up by the European Community. Although the European Court of Justice is the supreme court of the European Community, the onus is on the lower; that is to say national, courts to apply the Community law. Private parties can apply to national courts to enforce their Community rights where their national law provides lesser rights than Community law. However, where the national courts are unclear on the meaning of the Community legislation, they may seek clarification from the European Court of Justice. In the case of Community law which should have been transposed into national law, the applicant may request the Commission to take proceedings under Article 226 (ex 169) EC against the Member State for failing to do so. The cases of Van Gend en Loos (Case 26/62)[1], Von Colson (Case14/83)[2] and Francovich (Cases C-6/90 & C-9/90) are three precedential cases which have played important parts in providing avenues which now enable private party applicants to enforce Community rights given to them by various provisions of EC law in their national courts.
Although Community law is part of our legal system and is therefore directly applicable in the UK, not all Community law is directly effective, that is to say, capable of judicial enforcement. The Court of Justice has ruled in a number of cases that for a Treaty Article, Regulation or Decision to be directly effective, it must be sufficiently clear and unconditional for reliance to be placed on it, and there must be no scope for the exercise of Member State discretion in implementing it....