Other types of secondary legislation immediately place legal obligations directly into the legal system of all Member States. These are binding in their entirety and said to be directly applicable. Still other types place legal obligations directly upon certain named States, individuals and organisations. (4) The treaties, regulations and directives enacted by the Union do not directly state that they give individuals rights that they can enforce in their national courts. These legal rules are addressed in the first place to the Union and the Member State. Yet under the founding treaties Member States are expected to enforce the rights, liabilities and powers that are a consequence of membership in national courts. The ECJ has developed the concept of direct effect which describes EC primary or secondary law that give individuals rights that are enforceable in their national courts. Set criteria have to be present. Direct effect is easier to prove in relation to regulations than it is in relation to articles and directives. The criteria demand that: • the rule does not require any action from the State (and directives do); and • that the right to be enforced is clear and precise and can be activated without recourse to the State (which is not the automatic case in relation to articles in a treaty concluded at State level or a directive issued to the State demanding certain outcomes within a timescale). However, articles and directives considered on a case by case basis by the European and national courts have been held to give individuals rights. The case of Van Gend en Loos discussed later in this chapter deals with direct applicability and direct effect of articles. (5) A major difficulty is caused by the lack of uniformity of terms in relation to ‘directly applicable’ and ‘direct effect’. ‘Directly applicable’ is the phrase used in Article 249 (formerly 189) of the EC Treaty to refer to the process by which Community law of certain types is immediately and automatically part of the legal system of Member States as soon as it is created in the EC. ‘Direct effect’, which is not a phrase occurring in any of the treaties, is the phrase consistently used in the ECJ in two senses to refer to: • the process by which individuals acquire rights they can enforce in national courts (against other individuals—horizontal direct effect, and against the State itself—vertical direct effect); and • the process by which EC law is immediately and automatically part of the legal system of Member States as soon as it is created in the EC. This is confusing, especially as some Community law that is created by Article 249 (formerly 177) of the EC Treaty is not said in the Treaty to be directly applicable in the sense of immediately and automatically becoming part of the legal system of Member States. Yet the ECJ has held that such law can, if certain criteria are present, have direct effect. In fact, they have gone one step further and constructed the concept of indirect effect. It is indirect precisely because the law is not directly applicable but somehow an individual can enforce it in a national court.

DOI link for Other types of secondary legislation immediately place legal obligations directly into the legal system of all Member States. These are binding in their entirety and said to be directly applicable. Still other types place legal obligations directly upon certain named States, individuals and organisations. (4) The treaties, regulations and directives enacted by the Union do not directly state that they give individuals rights that they can enforce in their national courts. These legal rules are addressed in the first place to the Union and the Member State. Yet under the founding treaties Member States are expected to enforce the rights, liabilities and powers that are a consequence of membership in national courts. The ECJ has developed the concept of direct effect which describes EC primary or secondary law that give individuals rights that are enforceable in their national courts. Set criteria have to be present. Direct effect is easier to prove in relation to regulations than it is in relation to articles and directives. The criteria demand that: • the rule does not require any action from the State (and directives do); and • that the right to be enforced is clear and precise and can be activated without recourse to the State (which is not the automatic case in relation to articles in a treaty concluded at State level or a directive issued to the State demanding certain outcomes within a timescale). However, articles and directives considered on a case by case basis by the European and national courts have been held to give individuals rights. The case of Van Gend en Loos discussed later in this chapter deals with direct applicability and direct effect of articles. (5) A major difficulty is caused by the lack of uniformity of terms in relation to ‘directly applicable’ and ‘direct effect’. ‘Directly applicable’ is the phrase used in Article 249 (formerly 189) of the EC Treaty to refer to the process by which Community law of certain types is immediately and automatically part of the legal system of Member States as soon as it is created in the EC. ‘Direct effect’, which is not a phrase occurring in any of the treaties, is the phrase consistently used in the ECJ in two senses to refer to: • the process by which individuals acquire rights they can enforce in national courts (against other individuals—horizontal direct effect, and against the State itself—vertical direct effect); and • the process by which EC law is immediately and automatically part of the legal system of Member States as soon as it is created in the EC. This is confusing, especially as some Community law that is created by Article 249 (formerly 177) of the EC Treaty is not said in the Treaty to be directly applicable in the sense of immediately and automatically becoming part of the legal system of Member States. Yet the ECJ has held that such law can, if certain criteria are present, have direct effect. In fact, they have gone one step further and constructed the concept of indirect effect. It is indirect precisely because the law is not directly applicable but somehow an individual can enforce it in a national court.

Other types of secondary legislation immediately place legal obligations directly into the legal system of all Member States. These are binding in their entirety and said to be directly applicable. Still other types place legal obligations directly upon certain named States, individuals and organisations. (4) The treaties, regulations and directives enacted by the Union do not directly state that they give individuals rights that they can enforce in their national courts. These legal rules are addressed in the first place to the Union and the Member State. Yet under the founding treaties Member States are expected to enforce the rights, liabilities and powers that are a consequence of membership in national courts. The ECJ has developed the concept of direct effect which describes EC primary or secondary law that give individuals rights that are enforceable in their national courts. Set criteria have to be present. Direct effect is easier to prove in relation to regulations than it is in relation to articles and directives. The criteria demand that: • the rule does not require any action from the State (and directives do); and • that the right to be enforced is clear and precise and can be activated without recourse to the State (which is not the automatic case in relation to articles in a treaty concluded at State level or a directive issued to the State demanding certain outcomes within a timescale). However, articles and directives considered on a case by case basis by the European and national courts have been held to give individuals rights. The case of Van Gend en Loos discussed later in this chapter deals with direct applicability and direct effect of articles. (5) A major difficulty is caused by the lack of uniformity of terms in relation to ‘directly applicable’ and ‘direct effect’. ‘Directly applicable’ is the phrase used in Article 249 (formerly 189) of the EC Treaty to refer to the process by which Community law of certain types is immediately and automatically part of the legal system of Member States as soon as it is created in the EC. ‘Direct effect’, which is not a phrase occurring in any of the treaties, is the phrase consistently used in the ECJ in two senses to refer to: • the process by which individuals acquire rights they can enforce in national courts (against other individuals—horizontal direct effect, and against the State itself—vertical direct effect); and • the process by which EC law is immediately and automatically part of the legal system of Member States as soon as it is created in the EC. This is confusing, especially as some Community law that is created by Article 249 (formerly 177) of the EC Treaty is not said in the Treaty to be directly applicable in the sense of immediately and automatically becoming part of the legal system of Member States. Yet the ECJ has held that such law can, if certain criteria are present, have direct effect. In fact, they have gone one step further and constructed the concept of indirect effect. It is indirect precisely because the law is not directly applicable but somehow an individual can enforce it in a national court.