3.3.3 The practice of other states : It is impossible to discern any uniform practice among states, although a number of similarities in approach can be identified. The majority of states with a common law system adopt an approach similar to that in Britain. Those states which have a written constitution do have the opportunity to make the situation clear by making specific reference to the status of international law. For

doi:10.4324/9781843143802-13

Chapter

Chapter

ABSTRACT

The monist conception is more in line with the ECJ’s conception of the European Community legal system,26 and it has applied it in its consideration of the relationship between international agreements and community law. The ECJ has applied a very extensive interpretation of Article 177 in the context of international agreements. A Council Decision or Regulation concluding an international agreement (in the sense of internal EC acceptance) is one of the

‘acts’ of a Community institution for the purposes of Article 177(1)(b). So too are the decisions of an Association Council since they give effect and the Association Council is entrusted with responsibility for the implementation of the agreement.28 Therefore, the ECJ has jurisdiction to rule on the ‘validity’ and ‘interpretation’ of those acts under the preliminary reference procedure.29 In the SPI and SAMI case the ECJ ruled that jurisdiction also extended to an agreement, the GATT, to which the EC had succeeded as a matter of law and so there was no Community act at all.30