Supranational influence in EU enforcement: The ECJ and the principle of state liability

Journal of European Public Policy

Volumn 7, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 104-121

  Tallberg, Jonas ^a  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Compliance; Enforcement; European Court of Justice; Principal agent; State liability

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034387190     PISSN: 13501763     EISSN: 14664429     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/135017600343296     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Alchian, Armen A. and Demsetz, Harold (1972) ‘Production, information costs, and economic organization’, American Economic Review 62: 777–95.
2. Alter, Karen J. (1998) ‘Who are the “Masters of the Treaty”?: European governments and the European Court of Justice’, International Organization 52(1): 121–47.
3. Alter, Karen J. (1999) ‘Where, when and how does the European legal system influence domestic policy?’ Paper presented at the Sixth Biennial International ECSA Conference, Pittsburgh, 2–5 June.
4. Burley, Anne-Marie and Mattli, Walter (1993) ‘Europe before the Court: a political theory of legal integration’, International Organization 47(1): 41–76.
5. Caranta, Roberto (1993) ‘Governmental liability after Francovich’, Cambridge Law Journal 52(2): 272–97.
6. Conant, Lisa (1998) ‘Contained justice: the politics behind Europe’s rule of law’, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Washington.
7. Craig, P.P. (1993) ‘Francovich, remedies and the scope for damages liability’, Law Quarterly Review 109: 595–621.
8. Craig, P.P. (1997) ‘Once more unto the breach: the Community, the state and damages liability’, Law Quarterly Review 113: 67–94.
9. Cram, Laura (1997) Policy-making in the EU, London: Routledge.
10. Davis, David (1995) ‘1996 Inter-governmental Conference: European Court of Justice’. Paper distributed in the Reflection Group, September.
11. Deards, Elspeth (1997) ‘Brasserie du Pêcheur: snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?’, European Law Review 22: 620–5.
12. Dehousse, Renaud (1998) The European Court of Justice, Basingstoke: Macmillan.
13. Emiliou, Nicholas (1996) ‘State liability under Community law: shedding more light on the Francovich principle?’, European Law Review 21(5): 399–411.
14. European Commission (1991) ‘Intergovernmental conferences: contributions by the Commission’, Bulletin of the European Communities, Supplement 2/91.
15. European Commission (1997) ‘Fourteenth annual report on monitoring the application of Community law (1996)’, COM (97) 299 Final (29.05.1997).
16. European Commission (1998) ‘Fifteenth annual report on monitoring the application of Community law (1997)’, COM (98) 317 Final (19.05.1998).
17. European Court of Justice (1975) ‘Suggestions of the Court of Justice on European Union’, Bulletin of the European Communities, Supplement 9/75, pp. 17–21.
18. European Court of Justice (1991) Francovich and Others v. Italy, Joined Cases C-6/90 and C-9/90, ECR, 1991, p. 5357.
19. European Court of Justice (1996a, b) Brasserie du Pêcheur v. Germany and The Queen v. Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte Factortame, Joined Cases C-46/93 and C-48/93, ECR, 1996, p. 1029.
20. European Court of Justice (1996c) The Queen v. H.M. Treasury, ex parte British Telecommunications, Case C-392/93, ECR, 1996, p. 1631.
21. European Court of Justice (1996d) The Queen v. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, ex parte Hedley Lomas, Case C-5/94, ECR, 1996, p. 2553.
22. European Court of Justice (1996e) Dillenkofer and Others v. Germany, Joined Cases C-178/94, C-179/94, C-188/94, C-189/94 and C-190/94, ECR, 1996, p. 4845.
23. European Parliament (1983) ‘Report drawn up on behalf of the Legal Affairs Committee on the responsibility of member states for the application of Community law’, Document 1-1052/82.
24. FIDE (1998) Les Directives communautaires: effets, efficacité, justiciabilité, XVIII Congrès FIDE, 3–6 June, Stockholm.
25. Garrett, Geoffrey (1992) ‘International cooperation and institutional choice: the European Community’s internal market’, International Organization 46(2): 533–60.
26. Garrett, Geoffrey and Weingast, Barry (1993) ‘Ideas, interests and institutions: constructing the EC’s internal market’, in Judith Goldstein and Robert O. Keohane (eds), Ideas and Foreign Policy, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
27. Garrett, Geoffrey, Kelemen, R. Daniel and Schulz, Heiner (1998) ‘The European Court of Justice, national governments, and legal integration in the European Union’, International Organization 52(1): 149–76.
28. IGC (1996a) ‘Memorandum by the United Kingdom on the European Court of Justice’, CONF/3883/96, 25 Jul
29. IGC (1996b) ‘Note de transmission. Objet: Création de la possibilité de transférer au Tribunal de Première Instance les procédures relatives aux questions préjudicielles. Présenté par la délégation allemande’, CONF/3862/96, 22 October.
30. IGC (1997) ‘Proposition d’amendement de la délégation française sur la Cour de Justice’, CONF/3853/97, 25 March.
31. Jönsson, Christer and Tallberg, Jonas (1998) ‘Compliance and post-agreement bargaining’, European Journal of International Relations 4(4): 371-408.
32. McCubbins, Mathew D. and Schwartz, Thomas (1984) ‘Congressional oversight over looked: police patrols versus fire alarms’, American Journal of Political Science 28: 165–79.
33. Mendrinou, Maria (1996) ‘Non-compliance and the European Commission’s role in integration’, Journal of European Public Policy 3(1): 1–22.
34. Moravcsik, Andrew (1993) ‘PREFERENCES and power in the European Community: a liberal intergovernmentalist approach’, Journal of Common Market Studies 31(4): 473–524.
35. Moravcsik, Andrew (1995) ‘Liberal intergovernmentalism and integration: a rejoinder’, Journal of Common Market Studies 33(4): 611–28.
36. Neill, Patrick (1995) ‘The European Court of Justice: a case study in judicial activism’, London: European Policy Forum.
37. Pollack, Mark A. (1996) ‘The engines of integration? Supranational autonomy and influence in the European Community’, Working Paper 2.41, Center for German and European Studies, University of California, Berkeley.
38. Pollack, Mark A. (1997) ‘Delegation, agency, and agenda setting in the European Community’, International Organization 51(1): 99–134.
39. Ross, Malcolm (1993) ‘Beyond Francovich’, Modern Law Review 56(1): 55–73.
40. Scharpf, Fritz (1988) ‘The joint-decision trap: lessons from German federalism and European integration’, Public Administration 66: 239–78.
41. Slaughter, Anne-Marie, Stone Sweet, Alec and Weiler, Joseph H.H. (eds) (1998) The European Court and National Courts – Doctrine and Jurisprudence. Legal Change in its Social Context, Oxford: Hart Publishing.
42. Snyder, Francis (1993) ‘The effectiveness of European Community law: institutions, processes, tools and techniques’, Modern Law Review 56(1): 19–54.
43. Steiner, Josephine (1993) ‘From direct effects to Francovich: shifting means of enforcement of Community law’, European Law Review 18(1): 3–22.
44. Steiner, Josephine (1995) Enforcing EC Law, London: Blackstone.
45. Stone Sweet, Alec and Caporaso, James A. (1998) ‘From free trade to supranational polity: the European Court and integration’, in Wayne Sandholtz and Alec Stone Sweet (eds), European Integration and Supranational Governance, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
46. SOU (1997) ‘Det allmännas skadeståndsansvar vid överträdelse av EG-regler’, SOU 1997:194.
47. Tallberg, Jonas (1999) ‘Making states comply: the European Commission, the European Court of Justice, and the enforcement of the internal market’, Ph.D. dissertation, Lund University.
48. Tirole, Jean (1986) ‘Hierarchies and bureaucracies: on the role of collusion in organizations’, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 2(2): 181–214.
49. Weiler, J.H.H. (1991) ‘The transformation of Europe’, Yale Law Journal 100: 2403–83.
50. Weiler, J.H.H. (1993) ‘Journey to an unknown destination: a retrospective and prospective of the European Court of Justice in the arena of political integration’, Journal of Common Market Studies 31(4): 417–46.
51. Weiler, J.H.H. (1994) ‘A quiet revolution. The European Court of Justice and its interlocutors’, Comparative Political Studies 26(4): 510–34.