Hierarchy of norms in European law

Common Market Law Review

Volumn 33, Issue 5, 1996, Pages 907-930

  Bieber, Roland ^a   Salomé, Isabelle ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LAUSANNE   (Switzerland)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 21444456471     PISSN: 01650750     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.54648/119846     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. EC-Bulletin 2/1991, p. 127-134.
2. The Netherlands and Europe (The Hague, 1995), p 269
3. Cf. Justus Lipsius, "The 1996 IGC", (1995) EL Rev., 235,
4. and Ludlow and Ersbøll, Towards 1996: The Agenda of the Intergovernmental Conferences, Centre for European Policy Studies (1994), p. 53.
5. Cf. Simon, "The Organization of Complex Systems" in Simon (Ed.), Models of Discovery (Dordrecht, 1977), pp. 245-261.
6. Cf. Ross, Theorie der Rechtsquellen (Copenhagen, 1929), p. 316;
7. for a recent publication, discussing federal systems and the EC system in particular see Schilling, Rang und Geltung von Normen in gestuften Rechtsordnungen, (Berlin/Baden-Baden, 1994).
8. Cf. Radbruch, Rechtsphilosophie, 8th ed., (Stuttgart 1973), § 9.
9. Cf. Case 68/86, UK v. Council, [1988] ECR 900, para 48; see also Court of First Instance, Case T-285/94, Pfloeschner v. Commission, Judgment of 14 Dec. 1995, nyr, para 51.
10. Therefore a provision like Art. 9, para 3 of the Spanish Constitution ("The constitution guarantees the hierarchy of norms") does not fulfil a useful purpose.
11. Cf. Art. 31 German Grundgesetz: "Federal law preempts state law".
12. For a comparative study see Reiners, "Die Normenhierarchie in den Gründerstaaten der Europäischen Gemeinschaft", 23 Jahrbuch des öffentlichen Rechts der Gegenwart (Tübingen, 1974), p. 1-46;
13. Pizzorusso (Ed.), Law in the Making (Berlin/Heidelberg, 1988);
14. Winter (Ed.), Sources and categories of European Union Law (Baden-Baden, 1996).
15. Cf. Arts. A ("An ever closer Union") and B TEU.
16. On this paradox, beneficial for the evolution of EC Law, see Weiler, Il sistema comunitario europeo (Bologna, 1985); cf. also Dowrick, "A Model of the EC legal System", 3 YEL, pp. 169-237 and 225-237.
17. Cf. Tizzano, "The instruments of Community law and the hierarchy of norms" in Asser Instituut (Ed.), The Treaty on European Union, Suggestions for Revision (The Hague, 1996).
18. Case 38/70, Tradax/Einfuhr- u. Vorratsstelle, [1971] ECR 145; Case 34/78, Yoshida/Kamer van Koophandel, [1919] ECR 115; Case 145/79, Roquette v. France, [1980] ECR 2917, 2940, 2945; Court of First Instance, T-536/93, Benzler v. Commission, [1994] ECR (SP) 11-777, para 33; T-285/94, Pfloeschner, supra note 7.
19. Legal doctrine hardly takes even notice of problems of hierarchy. Cf. however Beutler, Bieber, Pipkorn and Streil, Die Europäische Union, 4th ed. (Baden-Baden, 1993), pp. 203-206
20. and Bieber, Das Verfahrensrecht von Verfassungsorganen (Baden-Baden, 1992), pp. 223-266.
21. Cf. also Blumann, La fonction législative communautaire (Paris, 1995), pp. 5-32; Dowrick, supra note 12 at 180-182;
22. Magiera, "Zur Reform der Normenhierarchie im Recht der Europäischen Union", (1995) Integration, 197-208;
23. Winter (Ed.), Integration op. cit. supra note 10.
24. Cf. Case 16/88, Commission v. Council, [1989] ECR 3457 and Heintzen, "Hierarchisierungsprozesse innerhalb des Primärrechts der Europäischen Gemeinschaft", (1994) EuR, 35-49.
25. Cf. Bieber, supra note 15, 240-266.
26. Case 106/77, Simmenthal v. Amministrazione delle Finanze, [1978] ECR 629, para 17.
27. See supra note 9.
28. For EC acts this result already follows from Art. 174 EC.
29. Cf. Case 188-190/80, France and others v. Commission, [1982] ECR 2545, para 6 (concerning the relationship between Council and Commission).
30. Cf. Opinion of A.G. Lenz in Case 165/87, Commission v. Council, [1988] ECR 5545, para 27. See however Case 5/73, Balkan-Import v. Hauptzollamt Berlin, [1973] ECR 1091, para 14.
31. The maximum of institutions participate in the adoption of staff rules, on which, according to Art. 24 Merger Treaty, all institutions have to be consulted. A list of the various procedures is published in the Commisson report for the reflection group on the IGC of May 1995, p. 80-84.
32. Art. 3, First Protocol (1952) to the European Convention on Human Rights.
33. Exception: e.g. Art. 213 EC combined with Art. 148(1)EC. Cf. Case C-426/93, Germany v. Council, Judgment of 9 Nov. 1995, nyr.
34. Case C-300/89, Commission v. Council, [1991] ECR I-2867.
35. Art. 189 B, 189 C EC.
36. "The scope of the procedure under this Article may be widened...".
37. Cf. Case 25/70, Einfuhr-. Vorratsstelle v. Köster, [1970] ECR 1161; Case 23/75, Rey Soda v. Cassa Zucchero, [1975] ECR 1279; Case 230/78, Eridania v. Ministero dell' agricoltura, [1979] ECR 2749; Case 240/90, Germany v. Commission, [1992] ECR I-5383.
38. This situation occurs for example with regard to implementing measures for the EC staff Rules, cf. cases cited supra note 14.
39. E.g. Arts. 164 and 238 EC cf. ECJ Opinion 1/91, [1991] ECR I-6079, para 20; cf. Bieber, "Wandel und Unveränderlichkeit als Strukturmerkmale des Europarechts", (1993) Zeitschrift für Schweizerisches Recht, 327-335;
40. Da Cruz Vilaça and Picarra, "Y-a-t-il des limites matérielles à la révision des traités instituant les Communautés européennes?" (1993) CDE, 3-47;
41. Herdegen, "Vertragliche Eingriffe in das 'Verfassungssystem' der EU" in Festschrift für Everling, Vol. I (Baden-Baden, 1995), pp. 447-461.
42. Cf. however, Heintzen, Festschrift für Everling, op. cit. supra note 16, 35-50.
43. Case 16/88, Commission v. Council, [1988] ECR 3457.
44. E.g. Case 45/86, Commission v. Council, [1987] ECR 1493; Case 56/88, UK v. Council, [1989] ECR 1615.
45. Case C-300/89, Commission v. Council, [1991] ECR I-2867 ("Titanium dioxide").
46. E.g. Majorities in Parliament and Council: Art. 141, 148 EC, "Save as otherwise provided ..."; application of conciliation and co-operation procedure: Arts. 189B, 189C EC, "Where reference is made in this Treaty to this Article for the adoption of an act, the following procedure shall apply ....; Constituent meeting of Parliament: Art. 10 Direct Elections Act, "Without prejudice to ... Article 139 ... The European Parliament shall meet..."
47. E.g. Art. 5 of the Direct Elections Act declares compatible with Membership in the European Parliament the holding of an office in the Parliament of a Member State whilst Art. 6 of the same Act authorizes the Member States to adopt additional incompatibilities. Does Art. 6 include a right to declare membership in national and European Parliaments incompatible? In other words, what hierarchy, if at all, exists between Arts. 5 and 6 of the Direct Elections Act?
48. Case 25/70, Köster v. Einfuhr u. Vorratstelle, [1970] ECR 1161; C-240/90, Germany v. Commission, [1992] ECR 5383; C-471/93, Parliament v. Council, [1995] ECR I-1185; C-156/93, Parliament v. Commission, [1995] ECR I-2019.
49. E.g. CFI Case T-285/94, Pfloeschner, supra note 7.
50. E.g.: Regulation 804/68 concerning the common organization of dairy products, O.J. 1968, L 148/13. Cf. Snyder, "The use of legal acts in EC agricultural policy" in Winter (Ed), op. cit. supra note 10, pp. 347-384.
51. For an enumeration of atypical acts, cf. Isaac, Droit communautaire général (1994), pp. 128-132.
52. E.g. Art. 173(1)EC; Art. 177(1)(b) EC.
53. Cf. Joined Cases 16 and 17/62, Confédération nationale des producteurs de fruits et légumes et autres v. Council, [1962] ECR 901, at 917, paras. 8 and 9; Case 25/62, Plaumann & Co. v. Commission, [1963] ECR 197; Case C-25/94, Commission v. Council, Judgment of 19 March 1996, nyr.
54. O.J. 1984, C 77/33, Art. 34, 40. Cf. Capotorti, Hilf et al., The European Union Treaty, Commentary (London, 1986).
55. O.J. 1991, C 129/136-139.
56. EC-Bulletin 2/1991, p. 127-134.
57. O.J. 1995, C 151/51, para 32 (i). See also report of the institutional committee, drafted by Bourlanges and Martin, Doc EP A4-0102/95/Part III (working documents of the co-draftsmen).
58. Commission Report for the Reflection Group on the IGC of 10 May 1995, para 56.
59. Progress report from the chairman of the reflection group on the 1996 Intergovernmental Conference, SN 509/1/95 (Reflex 10) of 1 Sept. 1995 and final Report of 5 Dec. 1995.
60. E.g. decision on own resources, (ex. Art. 201 ), Act on direct elections (ex. Art. 138), decision on the seat of the institutions (ex. Art. 216). For a detailed analysis, cf. Bieber and Kahil, " Organic Law' in the European Union" in Winter (Ed.), The European Union Treaty, Commentary op. cit. supra note 10, pp. 423-451.
61. Cf. Case C-303/90, France v. Commission, [1991] ECR 1-5313; C-314/91, Weber v. European Parliament, [1993] ECR I-1093.
62. Cf. for example Reiners, op. cit. supra note 10, at p. 32.
63. Cf. Aubert, "La hiérarchie des règles", (1974) Revue de droit suisse, 193, at 198, para 9.
64. E.g. ex. Arts. 23 8/228 EC.
65. Doc. EP A 4-0102/95, part. III p. 4-8.
66. Cf. however the EP proposal of a new Article 189 in its resolution of 18 April 1991, O.J. 1991, C 129/138.
67. Winter, "Reforming the sources and categories" in Winter (Ed.) Revue de droit suisse op. cit. supra note 10, pp. 13-65 at p. 46 (with comparative references to constitutional law of Member States). Cf. also the "modus vivendi" agreed by the institutions on 20 Dec. 1994, O.J. 1995, C 293/1.
68. Art. 173(4) combined with Art. 184 EC.
69. Cf. Vandersanden, "Pour un élargissement du droit des particuliers d'agir en annulation contre des actes autres que les décisions qui leur sont adressées", (1995) CDE, 535-552.
70. See however Deubner, Deutsche Europapolitik: von Maastricht nach Kerneuropa? (Baden-Baden, 1995), p. 79.
71. E.g. Arts. 164 and 177 EC.