European Union National Court
European Union National Court
Various member states have attempted to challenge the competence of the European Union law through national courts. Firstly, Costa v ENEL was a significant judgment of the European Court of Justice. This verdict amplified the influence of the union’s decree over that of its constituent countries. Some of these member states have used their judicial organizations to disregard the effectiveness of the European Union policies. For example, various high courts argue that the union’s statutes ought to regard basic legal values of the affiliate nations. According to their judgment, the decisions of these states precede that of the union’s law. In addition, some countries have formulated policies that affirm this argument. For instance, the constitution of Ireland states that the regulations of the European Union do not nullify the country’s laws.
Likewise, Amministrazione Delle Finanze v Simmenthal SpA is a ruling that differed with the requirements of the European Union. An Italian court headed the case that involved importation charges imposed on a native. The authorities compelled the Italian citizen to pay veterinary and public health inspection fees for the merchandise obtained from France. This was in accordance with the policies of the European Union, which constitutes Italy among other nations. As a way of disagreeing with the union’s statutes, the Italian court authorized the Finance Ministry to reimburse the importation costs at an interest. This judgment was a clear violation of the European Union’s rule that promotes free movement of products among its member states.
Furthermore, an administrative court in Frankfurt provided a ruling on a case between Internationale Handelsgesellschaft GmbH and Einfuhr und Vorratsstelle fur. The argument was on authorizations offered to importers and exporters of rice products and other cereals. This argument arose from the contradicting laws of the state and the European Union. The regulations of this merger required these business operators to make a deposit assuring their performance during the transaction period. Upon considering the facts presented by both parties, the court declared that the policies of the union should not influence the validity of these business warrants. This decision disagreed with the terms of importation and exportation dictated by the association.
Getriede und Futtermittel (EVGF) is also a verdict that challenged the principles of the European Union. A Switzerland court ruled over a case that entailed importation of rice from the country to other member states of the merger. According to the court, the European Union has no right to formulate or implement policies that overthrow those of its constituent nation. The judge overseeing the case argued that importation and exportation of rice products obtained from Switzerland depends on the country’s constitution and other rules. This was a clear indication of the contradiction between rules of union and those of individual states.
In order to address the issues
rising from the European Union laws, Factortame Litigation enacted policies
that govern the operations of the member states. It sought to unify the laws of
these states with the main objective of strengthening the merger. The
constituent nations discussed all legal contradictions affecting the union
regulations. For example, the legal action addressed the idea of disapproving
parliamentary power. The proceedings resulted in transformation of the judiciary
from a conventional organ whose main mandate was to interpret the union’s laws
to a legitimate court.
Kahn, Peggy. 2008. The European Union. New York: Chelsea House. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=256868.
McDougall, Ian, and Hunt, Joanne Clare. n.d. The factortame litigation. Butterworths Law.
Nicholas. 2002. Access to European Union: law, economics, policies.
European Study Service.
 Peggy Kahn, The European Union (New York: Chelsea House, 2009), 45.
 Ibid., 49.
 Ibid., 50.
 Nicholas Moussis, Access to European Union: law, economics, policies (Belgium: European Study Service, 2002), 69.
 Ian McDougall and Joanne Clare Hunt, The factortame litigation (Butterworths Law), 110.