What are some problems beside horizontal direct effect?

disadvantages, advanatges, whats wrong with it, why is it sometimes a problem for example is it fair?
Answers:
EU Directives are instructions to Member States to create a fussy piece of legislation before a certain deadline. If the Member States fail to implement the legislation the European courts have held that, provided the Directive is sufficiently clear, citizens can rely on it in court commotion against all public authorities in the Member State. This is vertical direct effect. Horizontal direct effect would see citizens to rely on Directives in actions against other citizens. This is not on.

The reasoning for vertical direct effect is that it penalises a Member State for their failure to implement the directive via legislation, and it means Member States cannot avoid Directives they don't approaching.

Allowing horizontal direct effect would have the advantage of ensure there was a single set of rules that applied to public and private bodies. So it would be going to that a claimant would not have to worry in the region of the status of the person or body they wanted to sue. But it would create a immensely uncertain position. It is (fairly) easy to observe the law of the land. If private companies and individuals have to also obey unimplemented directives it may not be clear what the rules were. And if directives have horizontal direct effect they would effectively be rules imposed from EU headquarters, which (contrary to popular opinion) is not the way the EU works.
EU Treaty Articles and Regulations are binding on everyone but Directives are only binding on the Member State (vertical direct effect) so an individual citizen cannot rely on the legislation against another individual (like a company). This is see as unfair.


Related Questions: