The Premises, Assumptions, and Implications of Van Gend en Loos
Viewed from the Perspectives of Democracy and Legitimacy of International Institutions
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12199758 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Eyal Benvenisti (0000-0003-4568-9991, New York University, corresponding author), George W Downs (New York University) |
| Year | 2014 |
| Volume | 25 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 85-102 |
| Publication date | 2014-02-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | European Journal of International Law (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0938-5428 • E-ISSN: 1464-3596 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1093/ejil/cht084 |
| OpenAlex | W2103746976 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
In its Van Gend en Loos judgment, the ECJ assigned citizens directly enforceable rights vis-à-vis their respective state executives, and authorized national courts to protect those rights. What explains the Court's suspicion of state executives as the sole actors to implement Community law (acting directly or through the Commission)? What justifies its confidence in the ability of the national courts to protect the individuals
Democracy · Democratic legitimacy · Legitimacy · Political science · Sociology · International Arbitration and Investment Law · International Law and Human Rights · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law
| Citations per year | 0.11 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2017 - 2017 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |