Substantive Legitimate Expectations in Domestic and Community Law

Cambridge Law Journal

Volumn 55, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 289-312

  Craig, P P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85012461812     PISSN: 00081973     EISSN: 14692139     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0008197300098184     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. C. Forsyth, “The Provenance and Protection of Legitimate Expectations” [1988] C.L.J. 238
2. P. Elias, “Legitimate Expectation and Judicial Review”, New Directions in Judicial Review, (Jowell and Oliver, eds., 1988), pp. 37–50
3. P. Craig, “Legitimate Expectations; A Conceptual Analysis” (1992) 108 L.Q.R. 79
4. R. Singh, “Making Legitimate Use of Legitimate Expectations” (1994) 144 N.L.J. 1215.
5. [1994] 1 W.L.R. 74.
6. [1995] 2 All E.R. 714.
7. [1994] 1 W.L.R. 74, 92.
8. 1 W.L.R. pp. 92–93.
9. R. v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex p. Ruddock [1987] 1 W.L.R. 1482.
10. R. v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex p. Khan [1985] 1 All E.R. 40, 46.
11. [1994] 1 W.L.R. 74, 93–94.
12. 1 W.L.R. p. 94.
13. [1995] 2 All E.R. 714, 723.
14. 2 All E.R. p. 724.
15. 2 All E.R. p. 728.
16. 2 All E.R. pp. 728–729.
17. Citing A.-G. of Hong Kong v. Ng Yuen Shiu [1983] 2 A.C. 629 by way of example.
18. [1995] 2 All E.R. 714, 729.
19. 2 All E.R. p. 731.
20. 2 All E.R. p. 732.
21. 2 All E.R. p. 731.
22. [1995] 2 All E.R. 714, 723.
23. R. v. Home Secretary, ex p. Briggs, Green & Hargreaves [1996] COD. 168.
24. R. v. Liverpool Corporation, ex p. Liverpool Taxi Fleet Operators' Association [1972] 2 Q.B. 299.
25. [1994] 1 W.L.R. 74, 92.
26. 1 W.L.R. p. 94.
27. [1995] 2 All E.R. 714, 723–724.
28. [1995] 2 All E.R. 714, 731–732.
29. 2 All E.R. p. 731.
30. 2 All E.R. p. 732.
31. [1985] 1 All E.R. 40, 46.
32. [1972] 2 Q.B. 299, 308.
33. The example has obvious similarities to R. v. Secretary of Stale for Health, ex p. US Tobacco International Inc. [1992] Q.B. 353.
34. [1996] C.O.D. 168.
35. J. Schwarze, European Administrative Law (Sweet & Maxwell 1992), Chap. 6.
36. Paul Craig & Grainne de Burca, EC Law, Text, Cases & Materials (Oxford 1995), pp. 349–356.
37. Case 98/78, Firma A. Racke v. Hauptzollamt Mainz [1979] E.C.R. 69.
38. See also, Case 99/78, Weingut Gustav Decker KG v. Hauptzollamt Landau [1979] E.C.R. 101.
39. Where there is a pressing Community objective and where the legitimate expectations of those concerned are duly respected, then retroactivity may, exceptionally, be accepted by the Court in the non-criminal context, Case C-331/88, R. v. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and Secretary of State for Health, ex p. Fedesa [1990] E.C.R. 1–4023.
40. Cases 212–217/80, Salumi [1981] E.C.R. 2735.
41. Case 224/82, Meiko-Konservenfabrik v. Federal Republic of Germany [1983] E.C.R. 2539
42. Case 63/83, Regina v. Kent Kirk [1984] E.C.R. 2689.
43. The distinction between actual and apparent retroactivity is sometimes expressed alternatively in terms of a division between primary and secondary retroactivity, Bowen v. Georgetown University Hospital 488 U.S. 204 (1988).
44. See, e.g., Case 52/81, W. Faust v. Commission [1982] E.C.R. 3745, 3762
45. Case 245/81, Edeka v. Federal Republic of Germany [1982] E.C.R. 2745, 2758.
46. Case 2/75, Einfuhr-und- Vorratsstelle fur Getreide und Futtermittel v. Firma C. Mackprang [1975] E.C.R. 607.
47. E. Sharpston, “Legitimate Expectations and Economic Reality” (1990) 15 E.L.Rev. 103.
48. Case C-331/88, R. v. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and Secretary of State for Health, ex p. Fedesa [1990] E.C.R. 1–4023.
49. Case 120/86, Mulder v. Minister van Landbouw en Visserij [1988] E.C.R. 2321.
50. E.C.R. para. 23.
51. E.C.R. para. 24.
52. Cases C-104/89 & 37/90, Mulderv. Council and Commission [1992] E.C.R. 1–3061.
53. For general discussion of Article 215(2) see, Craig & de Burca, K C. Law, Text, Cases & Materials (Oxford 1995), Chap. 12.
54. See also, Case C-152/88, Sofrimport Sarl v. Commission [1990] E.C.R. 1–2477.
55. Case C-152/88, Sofrimport Sarl v. Commission [1990] E.C.R. 1–2477.
56. Case 74/74, CNTA SA v. Commission [1975] E.C.R. 533.
57. E.C.R. para. 42.
58. E.C.R. para. 43.
59. As recognised by Sedley J. in Hamble Fisheries [1995] 2 All E.R. 714, 731.
60. 2 All E.R. pp. 730–732.
61. P.P. Craig, Administrative Law (Sweet & Maxwell, 3rd ed., 1994), Chap. 18.
62. Schwarze, European Administrative Law (1992), pp. 991–1025
63. T.C. Hartley, The Foundations of European Community Law (Clarendon, 3rd ed., 1994), pp. 454–458.
64. Case 15/85, Consorzio Cooperative d' Abruzzo v. Commission [1987] E.C.R. 1005.
65. Cases 42, 49/59, SNUPAT v. High Authority [1961] E.C.R. 53
66. Case 14/61, Hoogovens v. High Authority [1962] E.C.R. 253.