Direct Effect, Indirect Effect and State Liability

This set of EU law notes looks at the difference between direct applicability and direct effect. The principles of direct effect, indirect effect, and state liability and how they relate to each other and how an individual may enforce rights under EU law in their national courts through the application of these principles.

Cases

The concept of direct effect

Van Gend en Loos v Nederlandse Administratie der Belastingen (Case 26/62) [1963] ECR 1

Guerrino Casati (Case 203-80), 1981 ECR 2595

Defrenne v. Sabena (Case 43/75), 1976 E.C.R. 455

The application of direct effect

Orsolina Leonesio v Ministero dell'agricoltura e foreste (Case 93-71)  1972 ECJ

Grad v Finanzamt Traustein (Case 9/70) 1970 ECR 825

The issue of enforceability of Directives

Van Duyn v Home Office 1974 (C-41/74) ECJ

Pubblico Ministero v Ratti (Case 148/78) [1979] ECR 1629

Marshall v Southampton and South West Area Health Authority (Teaching) (No 1) (Case 152/84) [1986] ECR 723

The concept of emanation of the State

Foster v British Gas plc (Case C-188/89) [1990] ECR I-3313

Indirect effect

Von Colson & Kamann v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen (Case 14/83) [1984] ECR 1891, combined with Harz v Deutsche Tradax (Case 79/83) [1984] ECR 1921

Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentación SA (Case C-106/89) [1990] ECR I-4135

Incidental horizontal effect

CIA Security v Signalson and Securitel (1996) C-194/94

State liability

Francovich & Bonifaci v Italian Republic (Cases C-6/90 & C-9/90) [1991] ECR I-5357

Brasserie du Pêcheur SA v Germany and R v Secretary of State for Transport ex p Factortame Ltd (No 4) (‘Factortame III’) (Cases C-46/93 & C-48/93) [1996] ECR I-1029)

R v HM Treasury, ex p British Telecommunications plc (Case C-392/93) [1996] ECR I-1631