noemon wrote:Let us be quite clear Ter, mr Connolly is arguing that the ECJ supersedes national law but what he fails to mention to his audience is that the ECJ only applies the law that national governments have instituted at EU level. He also fails to mention the following:
wikipedia on ECJ wrote:
The ECJ is the highest court of the European Union in matters of Union law, but not national law. It is not possible to appeal the decisions of national courts to the ECJ, but rather national courts refer questions of EU law to the ECJ. However, it is ultimately for the national court to apply the resulting interpretation to the facts of any given case. Although, only courts of final appeal are bound to refer a question of EU law when one is addressed. The treaties give the ECJ the power for consistent application of EU law across the EU as a whole.
Noemon, IStM that the part I bolded does, in fact, give the ECJ the power to override national laws. How else can it deal for the situation where 2 nations have laws that cover the same subject and allow or force opposite behavior?