Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 February 2019
The Member States of the European Union have diverse legal traditions explained in part by the dichotomy of common law and civil law systems. Yet notwithstanding this diversity all Member States have adjusted to the new legal order created by the European Community in accepting the primacy of EC law and the legal principles establishing by the European Court of Justice. This paper examines briefly the Irish experience in making that adjustment.
1 Opinion on Draft Agreement between EEC and EFTA of 13/12/91.Google Scholar
2 Van Gend en Loos 26/62 [1963] ECR 1.Google Scholar
3 Costa v. Enal – see - 6/64 [1964] ECR 585.Google Scholar
4 C - 11/70 Internationale Handels Gesellschaft GmbH v Einfuhr und Forratstelle fur Getride und Futtermittel [1970] ECR 1125.Google Scholar
5 C– 4/73 Nold v. Commission [1974] ECR 941.Google Scholar
6 C– 58/94 – The Netherlands v. Commission [1996] ECR 1 - 2168.Google Scholar
7 Article 6(1).Google Scholar
8 Article 6.Google Scholar
9 Article 29(4)(3).Google Scholar
10 ILRM [1994] 1, Volume 1, page 1.Google Scholar
11 Where implementing measures are required by the Regulation.Google Scholar
12 Irish Report [1987] 713.Google Scholar
13 Irish Parliament.Google Scholar
14 No. 2 1995 IR, page 10.Google Scholar
15 Article 5 Treaty of the European Community.Google Scholar
16 Hjalte Rasmussen “On Law and Policy.” Cappelletti “Is the European Court of Justice running wild” (1987) 12 ELRev. Weiler “The Court of Justice on Trial” (1987) 24 CMLRev. Arnull “Does the Court of Justice have inherent jurisdiction” (1990) 27 CMLRev. Hjalte Rasmussen “Between self restraint and activism – a judicial policy for the European Court” (1988) 13 ELRev.Google Scholar
17 Ireland and Denmark are the only member states where EC/EU Treaty changes may require referenda.Google Scholar