|
|
|
Home > Law > Law glossary > Law glossary
Reyners v Belgium (1974)
Last modified: Thu Feb 23 16:37:37 2006
C-2/74. M. Reyners, a Dutch national, was prohibited from practicing as an
advocate in the Belgian courts on the grounds that he did not have
Belgian nationality. Such discrimination would be forbidden by
(what is now) Art. 43 of the ECTreaty, but it was unclear whether
Art. 43 had DirectEffect. Under the principle of VanGendEnLoos1963, a
Treaty provision would be directly effective if, inter alia, it were unconditional
and did not leave any further implementation to the member states. However, in this
case Art. 44 provided that the Commission would issue various directives
creating the necessary legal obligations to give effect to Art. 43. These
directives had not been created at the time the case was heard.
The ECJ held that the principle of Art. 43 -- non-discrimination on the
grounds of nationality -- was clear. Despite the lack of specific
directives, Art. 43 did prohibit member states from acting in particular ways,
and it was therefore directly effective.
This case is interesting because it shows that, although the ECJ has frequently
been criticised for taking an interventionist stance when member states have failed
to meet their obligations under the Treaties, it is not averse to using direct
effect to counter Community non-compliance as well.
CaseLaw
EULaw
Law glossary index
|
|
|
|
Shameless plug
|
 By the author of this site. Buy on-line from Amazon USA | UK
|
|