![Development of Judicial Control of the European Communities [electronic resource] /](/search/themes/bootstrap3/images/libros.png)
Development of Judicial Control of the European Communities [electronic resource] /
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.
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Texto biblioteca |
| Language: | eng |
| Published: |
Dordrecht : Springer Netherlands,
1981
|
| Subjects: | Law., Private international law., Conflict of laws., International law., Comparative law., Public international law., Public International Law., Private International Law, International & Foreign Law, Comparative Law., |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-9019-0 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| id |
KOHA-OAI-TEST:228417 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
koha |
| institution |
COLPOS |
| collection |
Koha |
| country |
México |
| countrycode |
MX |
| component |
Bibliográfico |
| access |
En linea En linea |
| databasecode |
cat-colpos |
| tag |
biblioteca |
| region |
America del Norte |
| libraryname |
Departamento de documentación y biblioteca de COLPOS |
| language |
eng |
| topic |
Law. Private international law. Conflict of laws. International law. Comparative law. Public international law. Law. Public International Law. Private International Law, International & Foreign Law, Comparative Law. Law. Private international law. Conflict of laws. International law. Comparative law. Public international law. Law. Public International Law. Private International Law, International & Foreign Law, Comparative Law. |
| spellingShingle |
Law. Private international law. Conflict of laws. International law. Comparative law. Public international law. Law. Public International Law. Private International Law, International & Foreign Law, Comparative Law. Law. Private international law. Conflict of laws. International law. Comparative law. Public international law. Law. Public International Law. Private International Law, International & Foreign Law, Comparative Law. Bebr, Gerhard. author. SpringerLink (Online service) Development of Judicial Control of the European Communities [electronic resource] / |
| description |
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. |
| format |
Texto |
| topic_facet |
Law. Private international law. Conflict of laws. International law. Comparative law. Public international law. Law. Public International Law. Private International Law, International & Foreign Law, Comparative Law. |
| author |
Bebr, Gerhard. author. SpringerLink (Online service) |
| author_facet |
Bebr, Gerhard. author. SpringerLink (Online service) |
| author_sort |
Bebr, Gerhard. author. |
| title |
Development of Judicial Control of the European Communities [electronic resource] / |
| title_short |
Development of Judicial Control of the European Communities [electronic resource] / |
| title_full |
Development of Judicial Control of the European Communities [electronic resource] / |
| title_fullStr |
Development of Judicial Control of the European Communities [electronic resource] / |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Development of Judicial Control of the European Communities [electronic resource] / |
| title_sort |
development of judicial control of the european communities [electronic resource] / |
| publisher |
Dordrecht : Springer Netherlands, |
| publishDate |
1981 |
| url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-9019-0 |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT bebrgerhardauthor developmentofjudicialcontroloftheeuropeancommunitieselectronicresource AT springerlinkonlineservice developmentofjudicialcontroloftheeuropeancommunitieselectronicresource |
| _version_ |
1756271253948203008 |
| spelling |
KOHA-OAI-TEST:2284172018-07-31T00:10:31ZDevelopment of Judicial Control of the European Communities [electronic resource] / Bebr, Gerhard. author. SpringerLink (Online service) textDordrecht : Springer Netherlands,1981.engThe 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.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.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.Law.Private international law.Conflict of laws.International law.Comparative law.Public international law.Law.Public International Law.Private International Law, International & Foreign Law, Comparative Law.Springer eBookshttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-9019-0URN:ISBN:9789401190190 |