|
|
|
Home > Law > Law glossary > Law glossary
R v Secretary of State for Social Security ex parte Sutton (1997)
Last modified: Thu Feb 23 16:37:37 2006
[1997] ECR I-2163; C-66/95. The claimant was denied invalidity benefit,
in contravention of EC legislation. The benefits were eventually
payed, but without interest on the arrears. The claimant argued that
interest should be payable, using the same principle as that
ennunciated by the ECJ in MarshallII1993. On this occasion, however,
the ECJ was not prepared to award interest when UK law did not allow
for this. Marshall, it argued, received interest on compensation
paid for losses following from a breach of EC law. An award of interest
in such circumstances would not be unknown in UK law, and such an award
was necessary to give full effect to the Directive that was breached.
Here, however, the award was not of compensation, but of restitution, and
the ECJ refused to compel the payment of interest when it would not be
required under national law.
There are few logical grounds for this decision, if Marshall II is correct.
However, it was very widely felt that in Marshall II the ECJ had exceeded
its jurisdiction. The outcome of this case can therefore be explained as
an attempt to retreat from the broad principles established in Marshall II
by confining it to its particular facts.
CaseLaw
EULaw
Law glossary index
|
|
|
|
Shameless plug
|
 By the author of this site. Buy on-line from Amazon USA | UK
|
|