Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Direct applicability is a concept of European Union constitutional law that relates specifically to regulations, direct applicability (or the characteristic of regulations to be directly effective) is set out in Article 288 (ex Article 249) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (as amended by the Lisbon Treaty). [1]
Direct effect has subsequently been loosened in its application to treaty articles and the ECJ has expanded the principle, holding that it is capable of applying to virtually all of the possible forms of EU legislation, the most important of which are regulations, and in certain circumstances to directives.
Direct application of the Bill of Rights generates a constitutional remedy, whereas indirect application does not. The reason for this is that direct application is aimed at exposing inconsistency between the Bill of Rights and law or conduct. If there is, the court then declares that law or conduct constitutionally invalid.
In law, horizontal effect refers to the ability of legal requirements meant to apply only to public bodies to affect private rights. It arises where a court dealing with a legal dispute between purely private entities interprets a legal provision to be consistent with certain legal norms in such a way as to affect the legal rights and obligations of the parties before it.
In the First Amendment context, a plaintiff must show that 'a substantial number of [the law's] applications are unconstitutional, judged in relation to the statute's plainly legitimate sweep.' So ...
Under the principle of avoidance, a court will generally attempt to interpret legislation in conformity with the Bill of Rights before considering the direct application of the Bill of Rights. If an impugned provision can be read down as constitutional, the challenge to its constitutionality must fail, as it is consistent with the Constitution.
Command and Control (CAC) Regulation can be defined as “the direct regulation of an industry or activity by legislation that states what is permitted and what is illegal”. [1] This approach differs from other regulatory techniques, e.g. the use of economic incentives , which frequently includes the use of taxes and subsidies as incentives ...
Where legislation and case law are in conflict, there is a presumption that legislation takes precedence insofar as there is any inconsistency. In the United Kingdom this principle is known as parliamentary sovereignty ; but while Parliament has exclusive competence to legislate, the courts (mindful of their historic role of having developed ...