EU Law Assignment Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

EU Law Assignment - Case Study ExampleThe Fictitious Carrier Pigeons Directive 2004 provides that all carrier pigeons must(prenominal) be subject to quarterly veterinary inspections, their health problems must be promptly remedied, and that the animals must be kept separately from other animals, until they are advised as being in good health. If certification does not take place within three months of the inspection reporting problems, the animals must be slaughtered. more than importantly the engageive provides that a fund must be set up to compensate farmers whose animals are slaughtered pursuant to the directive. The directive was to be transposed into UK justice on the 1st of January and the time has expired as at now .In such circumstances the Council would be entitled to commence a formal penis 226 action if subtle persuasion and warnings failed to convince the UK that it should implement the directive within reasonable time .According to Article 226 if the commission co nsiders that a member state has failed to suffer an obligation under this Treaty it shall deliver a reason opinion of this matter. Therefore once the commission has been alerted regarding this implementing omission of the UK.1 Following the reply from the member state or after a reasonable time where no reply is received the commission will then deliver a wakeless opinion which records the reasons for the failure UK to implement this directive which required the setting up of a fund and the treatment of such pigeons.2.If the matter is taken to the ECJ in this regard, its notion would be merely declaratory the member states are required under Art 228 to take the necessary measures to comply with the judgment. It seems here that the UK does not get hold of a defence that could be raised for non compliance because under Art 10EC the member states are required to fulfill all their community practice of law obligations and Art 292 obliges genus Phallus States not to seek other solu tions to disputes. S and A are advised that if the UK does not comply with this judgment a further action may imposition against their government under Art 226 for a breach of Art 228.3 Remedies for S and ASecondly, coming to the remedies available to S and A because of the loss of profit they have suffered due to the death of their gaming pigeons ,they are advised to start an action for compensation for the dead pigeons with a UK court. They can rely on community law within their domestic courts but only on the condition that the directive must have either been already implemented by the UK (which it has not been make so here) or give rise to direct effects. As mentioned before the directive has already passed its deadline for implementation by the UK. Therefore subject to the application of the doctrine of direct effect in this regard S and A might have a possible remedy under EU law.The doctrine of direct effect is one of the most important aspects of the community law. Summari sed, it states that community law creates legal rights which are directly enforceable by individuals in member states. This was held in the case of Van Gend En Loos v Nederlandse Belastingadministratie (case 26/62) as follows4If a legal instrument of the EU confers direct effects then the individual has venue standi to enforce a right under community law in national courts and the European Court of Justice (ECJ) .Under Article 249 EC