Last visited:
Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA (1989)
Created by 121.1.18.237 on 3 November 2009, at 10:20



From Law wiki, the wiki for law research

Jump to: navigation, search
Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA
ECJ
short name: {{{short_name}}}
Submi Date: 3 April
Submit Year: 1989
Date decided: 13 November 1990
Year decided: '
FullName: Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA
CelexID: {{{CelexID:}}}
CaseNumber: C-106/89
Chamber: Sixth chamber
Nationality: Spain
Procedural: Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción nº 1 de Oviedo, auto de 13 March 1989, Juzgado de Primera Instancia e Instrucción nº 1 de Oviedo, sentencia de 23 February 1991
Judge Rapporteur: Tom O'Higgins
JudgePresident:
Advocate General: Walter van Gerven
Instruments Cited:
Legislation Affecting: Interprets Directive 68/151/EEC
Keywords

C-106/89. The claimant company sought to have the defendant company struck off the register of companies under Spanish law, on the grounds that the sole purpose of the defendant company was to perpetrate frauds. The defendant sought to rely on a Directive issued by the Council of the eu that set out the grounds under which a company could be annulled. The question for the ECJ, therefore, was whether the defendant company could rely on this Directive.

Although there was, and still is, a great deal of uncertainty in this area, it appeared to be settled that Directives did not have horizontaldirect effect. That is, they did not create rights and obligations that could be enforced against one individual (or company) at the suit of another.

However, in this case the ECJ read Art. 10 of the ECTreaty -- which stipulates that member states should do whatever is necessary to give effect to the Treaties -- as meaning that national courts should decide in such a way as to give effect to the state's obligations under EC law. Now, even though a Directive is not immediately a part of national law, it clearly does create an obligation under EC law; at a minimum it creates an obligation to implement the directive. So in this case the defendant was entitled to rely on a Directive.

If this is not horizontal direct effect, it is clear very close to it.
Ukflag.png
EU.jpg

This page was last modified on 23 December 2011, at 07:10.This page has been accessed 2,377 times.