Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Poland and the EU are currently in a mega spat over who has the supremacy of law. The EU courts have just announced a fine of EUR 1 million a day on Poland. The EU position is effectively that EU law has supremacy because without that then the whole project becomes unwieldy and untenable. That is understandable. Polands position is basically “Under what clause in what treaty did Poland hand over that sovereignty?”. Which is an interesting and fairly pertinent observation for a democratic grouping to answer. Interestingly there is no clause in any treaty that gives EU law supremacy over national law (see link below). What has happened is that case law in the European courts has built up that kind of makes it a thing that everyone sort of agrees on although no one has actually agreed to it as a principle. How does this end? https://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/glossary/primacy_of_eu_law.html" Very good summary. The Polish position is also supported by the German Constitutional Court. And yes, if powers were handed to the EU unconstitutionally then the politicians of the day acted ultra vires...and their actions can't stand in law. Very interesting | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Poland and the EU are currently in a mega spat over who has the supremacy of law. The EU courts have just announced a fine of EUR 1 million a day on Poland. The EU position is effectively that EU law has supremacy because without that then the whole project becomes unwieldy and untenable. That is understandable. Polands position is basically “Under what clause in what treaty did Poland hand over that sovereignty?”. Which is an interesting and fairly pertinent observation for a democratic grouping to answer. Interestingly there is no clause in any treaty that gives EU law supremacy over national law (see link below). What has happened is that case law in the European courts has built up that kind of makes it a thing that everyone sort of agrees on although no one has actually agreed to it as a principle. How does this end? https://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/glossary/primacy_of_eu_law.html" Polexit is on the cards expecially if the European parliament implement sanctions on Poland. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Poland and the EU are currently in a mega spat over who has the supremacy of law. The EU courts have just announced a fine of EUR 1 million a day on Poland. The EU position is effectively that EU law has supremacy because without that then the whole project becomes unwieldy and untenable. That is understandable. Polands position is basically “Under what clause in what treaty did Poland hand over that sovereignty?”. Which is an interesting and fairly pertinent observation for a democratic grouping to answer. Interestingly there is no clause in any treaty that gives EU law supremacy over national law (see link below). What has happened is that case law in the European courts has built up that kind of makes it a thing that everyone sort of agrees on although no one has actually agreed to it as a principle. How does this end? https://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/glossary/primacy_of_eu_law.html Very good summary. The Polish position is also supported by the German Constitutional Court. And yes, if powers were handed to the EU unconstitutionally then the politicians of the day acted ultra vires...and their actions can't stand in law. Very interesting" It seems to me that the alternatives are: 1. The supremacy of law resides with the nation states and the EU becomes toothless because people will do what they want and no one can stop them. 2. A treaty is put in place that explicitly hands national sovereignty over to the EU. I find it hard to accept that literally every country will give up its sovereignty and so 2 is out isn’t it? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Poland and the EU are currently in a mega spat over who has the supremacy of law. The EU courts have just announced a fine of EUR 1 million a day on Poland. The EU position is effectively that EU law has supremacy because without that then the whole project becomes unwieldy and untenable. That is understandable. Polands position is basically “Under what clause in what treaty did Poland hand over that sovereignty?”. Which is an interesting and fairly pertinent observation for a democratic grouping to answer. Interestingly there is no clause in any treaty that gives EU law supremacy over national law (see link below). What has happened is that case law in the European courts has built up that kind of makes it a thing that everyone sort of agrees on although no one has actually agreed to it as a principle. How does this end? https://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/glossary/primacy_of_eu_law.html Very good summary. The Polish position is also supported by the German Constitutional Court. And yes, if powers were handed to the EU unconstitutionally then the politicians of the day acted ultra vires...and their actions can't stand in law. Very interesting It seems to me that the alternatives are: 1. The supremacy of law resides with the nation states and the EU becomes toothless because people will do what they want and no one can stop them. 2. A treaty is put in place that explicitly hands national sovereignty over to the EU. I find it hard to accept that literally every country will give up its sovereignty and so 2 is out isn’t it?" That seems about right | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" https://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/glossary/primacy_of_eu_law.html Polexit is on the cards expecially if the European parliament implement sanctions on Poland." I would be curious to know under what clause and treaty the parliament has the authority to impose sanctions on a nation state. I would guess that it is not actually in any treaty - which takes me back to my initial question but happy to be corrected. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" https://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/glossary/primacy_of_eu_law.html Polexit is on the cards expecially if the European parliament implement sanctions on Poland. I would be curious to know under what clause and treaty the parliament has the authority to impose sanctions on a nation state. I would guess that it is not actually in any treaty - which takes me back to my initial question but happy to be corrected." The EU is withholding a 36 billion euro grant to Poland for post pandemic rebuilding. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Poland and the EU are currently in a mega spat over who has the supremacy of law. The EU courts have just announced a fine of EUR 1 million a day on Poland. The EU position is effectively that EU law has supremacy because without that then the whole project becomes unwieldy and untenable. That is understandable. Polands position is basically “Under what clause in what treaty did Poland hand over that sovereignty?”. Which is an interesting and fairly pertinent observation for a democratic grouping to answer. Interestingly there is no clause in any treaty that gives EU law supremacy over national law (see link below). What has happened is that case law in the European courts has built up that kind of makes it a thing that everyone sort of agrees on although no one has actually agreed to it as a principle. How does this end? https://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/glossary/primacy_of_eu_law.html" Plexit??? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Poland and the EU are currently in a mega spat over who has the supremacy of law. The EU courts have just announced a fine of EUR 1 million a day on Poland. The EU position is effectively that EU law has supremacy because without that then the whole project becomes unwieldy and untenable. That is understandable. Polands position is basically “Under what clause in what treaty did Poland hand over that sovereignty?”. Which is an interesting and fairly pertinent observation for a democratic grouping to answer. Interestingly there is no clause in any treaty that gives EU law supremacy over national law (see link below). What has happened is that case law in the European courts has built up that kind of makes it a thing that everyone sort of agrees on although no one has actually agreed to it as a principle. How does this end? https://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/glossary/primacy_of_eu_law.html Plexit???" Why would that happen? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Poland and the EU are currently in a mega spat over who has the supremacy of law. The EU courts have just announced a fine of EUR 1 million a day on Poland. The EU position is effectively that EU law has supremacy because without that then the whole project becomes unwieldy and untenable. That is understandable. Polands position is basically “Under what clause in what treaty did Poland hand over that sovereignty?”. Which is an interesting and fairly pertinent observation for a democratic grouping to answer. Interestingly there is no clause in any treaty that gives EU law supremacy over national law (see link below). What has happened is that case law in the European courts has built up that kind of makes it a thing that everyone sort of agrees on although no one has actually agreed to it as a principle. How does this end? https://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/glossary/primacy_of_eu_law.html Plexit??? Why would that happen?" Poland has a difference of opinion to eu law when it comes to migration, human rights, lgbt rights and a few more bigoted opinions. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Poland and the EU are currently in a mega spat over who has the supremacy of law. The EU courts have just announced a fine of EUR 1 million a day on Poland. The EU position is effectively that EU law has supremacy because without that then the whole project becomes unwieldy and untenable. That is understandable. Polands position is basically “Under what clause in what treaty did Poland hand over that sovereignty?”. Which is an interesting and fairly pertinent observation for a democratic grouping to answer. Interestingly there is no clause in any treaty that gives EU law supremacy over national law (see link below). What has happened is that case law in the European courts has built up that kind of makes it a thing that everyone sort of agrees on although no one has actually agreed to it as a principle. How does this end? https://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/glossary/primacy_of_eu_law.html Plexit??? Why would that happen? Poland has a difference of opinion to eu law when it comes to migration, human rights, lgbt rights and a few more bigoted opinions." As per the start of the thread: the Polish position is that it has not actually signed any treaty that ceded that level of legal authority to another entity. I was genuinely surprised to find that this is actually true (unless someone can correct the EU website I referred to) so any observation about whether it’s politics are bigoted or not (they are by the way) is irrelevant. Unfortunately for the EU the Poles would appear to be on stronger legal ground. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Poland and the EU are currently in a mega spat over who has the supremacy of law. The EU courts have just announced a fine of EUR 1 million a day on Poland. The EU position is effectively that EU law has supremacy because without that then the whole project becomes unwieldy and untenable. That is understandable. Polands position is basically “Under what clause in what treaty did Poland hand over that sovereignty?”. Which is an interesting and fairly pertinent observation for a democratic grouping to answer. Interestingly there is no clause in any treaty that gives EU law supremacy over national law (see link below). What has happened is that case law in the European courts has built up that kind of makes it a thing that everyone sort of agrees on although no one has actually agreed to it as a principle. How does this end? https://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/glossary/primacy_of_eu_law.html Plexit??? Why would that happen? Poland has a difference of opinion to eu law when it comes to migration, human rights, lgbt rights and a few more bigoted opinions. As per the start of the thread: the Polish position is that it has not actually signed any treaty that ceded that level of legal authority to another entity. I was genuinely surprised to find that this is actually true (unless someone can correct the EU website I referred to) so any observation about whether it’s politics are bigoted or not (they are by the way) is irrelevant. Unfortunately for the EU the Poles would appear to be on stronger legal ground." A year or 2 of rattling around the legaslative paralysis of Brussels keeps them busy payed and no change. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" A year or 2 of rattling around the legaslative paralysis of Brussels keeps them busy payed and no change." So you are saying that the outcome of all this will be the EU avoids making a decision and punts it down the road? What happens if Poland decides to not play ball and keeps pushing? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU has levied a DAILY fine of €1 million on Poland, until the Poles change their position! They also have withheld €57 billion of covid recovery funds due to Poland. This comes on top of a continued daily fine of €500k, due to Poland not closing the huge coal mine at Turow. " The eu need to get money from somewhere now Treasure Island has left. My guess is they will eventually pay the e57 billion and kick the can down the road for a few years after all thats what its designed for to keep all the little piggies noses in the trough. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU has levied a DAILY fine of €1 million on Poland, until the Poles change their position! They also have withheld €57 billion of covid recovery funds due to Poland. This comes on top of a continued daily fine of €500k, due to Poland not closing the huge coal mine at Turow. The eu need to get money from somewhere now Treasure Island has left. My guess is they will eventually pay the e57 billion and kick the can down the road for a few years after all thats what its designed for to keep all the little piggies noses in the trough." Genuinely funny | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU has levied a DAILY fine of €1 million on Poland, until the Poles change their position! They also have withheld €57 billion of covid recovery funds due to Poland. This comes on top of a continued daily fine of €500k, due to Poland not closing the huge coal mine at Turow. The eu need to get money from somewhere now Treasure Island has left. My guess is they will eventually pay the e57 billion and kick the can down the road for a few years after all thats what its designed for to keep all the little piggies noses in the trough. Genuinely funny" True though. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU has levied a DAILY fine of €1 million on Poland, until the Poles change their position! They also have withheld €57 billion of covid recovery funds due to Poland. This comes on top of a continued daily fine of €500k, due to Poland not closing the huge coal mine at Turow. " Nothing like the thumb screws to get your own way, naughty naughty EU commission, surely Poland needs that recovery money now, although when you look at the amounts some countries are getting and what they are spending the cash on you soon see it will be the same ones as usual to come out on top whilst the poorer EU nations take another whack and become even more in debt. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU has levied a DAILY fine of €1 million on Poland, until the Poles change their position! They also have withheld €57 billion of covid recovery funds due to Poland. This comes on top of a continued daily fine of €500k, due to Poland not closing the huge coal mine at Turow. The eu need to get money from somewhere now Treasure Island has left. My guess is they will eventually pay the e57 billion and kick the can down the road for a few years after all thats what its designed for to keep all the little piggies noses in the trough. Genuinely funnyTrue though." Of course it's true, from your perspective, but for the rest of the world, not so much. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU has levied a DAILY fine of €1 million on Poland, until the Poles change their position! They also have withheld €57 billion of covid recovery funds due to Poland. This comes on top of a continued daily fine of €500k, due to Poland not closing the huge coal mine at Turow. Nothing like the thumb screws to get your own way, naughty naughty EU commission, surely Poland needs that recovery money now, although when you look at the amounts some countries are getting and what they are spending the cash on you soon see it will be the same ones as usual to come out on top whilst the poorer EU nations take another whack and become even more in debt." Im not so sure France have to put in 80billion and are only getting 40 billion back you can imagine how much the uk would have been shafted for if we were still in.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU has levied a DAILY fine of €1 million on Poland, until the Poles change their position! They also have withheld €57 billion of covid recovery funds due to Poland. This comes on top of a continued daily fine of €500k, due to Poland not closing the huge coal mine at Turow. Nothing like the thumb screws to get your own way, naughty naughty EU commission, surely Poland needs that recovery money now, although when you look at the amounts some countries are getting and what they are spending the cash on you soon see it will be the same ones as usual to come out on top whilst the poorer EU nations take another whack and become even more in debt.Im not so sure France have to put in 80billion and are only getting 40 billion back you can imagine how much the uk would have been shafted for if we were still in. "This isn’t really what the original question was about. It is a tad more existential than that - Poland is essentially claiming that the legal basis of a lot of the EU decision making process is null and void as countries have not handed over sovereignty under any treaty and therefore EU law cannot take primacy. It is interesting that not a single respondent on the thread has advocated a position (backed up by treaty references) that the Poles are wrong. If the Poles have a valid position (and I am not a lawyer so can’t comment but it would seem that they do) then that would appear to put the EU in a rather precarious place. Can anyone educate me as to what I am missing and please avoid the squabbles over the EU bureaucracy that happens on other threads. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU has levied a DAILY fine of €1 million on Poland, until the Poles change their position! They also have withheld €57 billion of covid recovery funds due to Poland. This comes on top of a continued daily fine of €500k, due to Poland not closing the huge coal mine at Turow. Nothing like the thumb screws to get your own way, naughty naughty EU commission, surely Poland needs that recovery money now, although when you look at the amounts some countries are getting and what they are spending the cash on you soon see it will be the same ones as usual to come out on top whilst the poorer EU nations take another whack and become even more in debt.Im not so sure France have to put in 80billion and are only getting 40 billion back you can imagine how much the uk would have been shafted for if we were still in.
This isn’t really what the original question was about. It is a tad more existential than that - Poland is essentially claiming that the legal basis of a lot of the EU decision making process is null and void as countries have not handed over sovereignty under any treaty and therefore EU law cannot take primacy.
It is interesting that not a single respondent on the thread has advocated a position (backed up by treaty references) that the Poles are wrong.
If the Poles have a valid position (and I am not a lawyer so can’t comment but it would seem that they do) then that would appear to put the EU in a rather precarious place.
Can anyone educate me as to what I am missing and please avoid the squabbles over the EU bureaucracy that happens on other threads."This all comes down to the treaties Poland signed up to. If they signed up to X, but now say they meant Y, then someone has to adjudicate, if the court of ajudication is defined in the treaties, then that's the path that must be followed. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU has levied a DAILY fine of €1 million on Poland, until the Poles change their position! They also have withheld €57 billion of covid recovery funds due to Poland. This comes on top of a continued daily fine of €500k, due to Poland not closing the huge coal mine at Turow. Nothing like the thumb screws to get your own way, naughty naughty EU commission, surely Poland needs that recovery money now, although when you look at the amounts some countries are getting and what they are spending the cash on you soon see it will be the same ones as usual to come out on top whilst the poorer EU nations take another whack and become even more in debt.Im not so sure France have to put in 80billion and are only getting 40 billion back you can imagine how much the uk would have been shafted for if we were still in.
This isn’t really what the original question was about. It is a tad more existential than that - Poland is essentially claiming that the legal basis of a lot of the EU decision making process is null and void as countries have not handed over sovereignty under any treaty and therefore EU law cannot take primacy.
It is interesting that not a single respondent on the thread has advocated a position (backed up by treaty references) that the Poles are wrong.
If the Poles have a valid position (and I am not a lawyer so can’t comment but it would seem that they do) then that would appear to put the EU in a rather precarious place.
Can anyone educate me as to what I am missing and please avoid the squabbles over the EU bureaucracy that happens on other threads.
This all comes down to the treaties Poland signed up to.
If they signed up to X, but now say they meant Y, then someone has to adjudicate, if the court of ajudication is defined in the treaties, then that's the path that must be followed."I agree with that. The problem is that they haven’t signed up to a treaty that gives the EU legal primacy (as per: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/glossary/primacy_of_eu_law.html) Therefore on what basis does the EU exert that primacy? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU has levied a DAILY fine of €1 million on Poland, until the Poles change their position! They also have withheld €57 billion of covid recovery funds due to Poland. This comes on top of a continued daily fine of €500k, due to Poland not closing the huge coal mine at Turow. Nothing like the thumb screws to get your own way, naughty naughty EU commission, surely Poland needs that recovery money now, although when you look at the amounts some countries are getting and what they are spending the cash on you soon see it will be the same ones as usual to come out on top whilst the poorer EU nations take another whack and become even more in debt.Im not so sure France have to put in 80billion and are only getting 40 billion back you can imagine how much the uk would have been shafted for if we were still in.
This isn’t really what the original question was about. It is a tad more existential than that - Poland is essentially claiming that the legal basis of a lot of the EU decision making process is null and void as countries have not handed over sovereignty under any treaty and therefore EU law cannot take primacy.
It is interesting that not a single respondent on the thread has advocated a position (backed up by treaty references) that the Poles are wrong.
If the Poles have a valid position (and I am not a lawyer so can’t comment but it would seem that they do) then that would appear to put the EU in a rather precarious place.
Can anyone educate me as to what I am missing and please avoid the squabbles over the EU bureaucracy that happens on other threads."You understand it correctly. The German Constitutional Court has made the same point. A barrister pointed out recently (in the Spectator, I think) that the EU can't claim legal supremacy. it has only ever been ASSUMED that they had supremacy. And then there is the issue of whether an ultra vires act can be allowed to stand in law. The difficulty the Poles will face is where the case is justiciable, given the pro-federalist constitution of the ECJ | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU has levied a DAILY fine of €1 million on Poland, until the Poles change their position! They also have withheld €57 billion of covid recovery funds due to Poland. This comes on top of a continued daily fine of €500k, due to Poland not closing the huge coal mine at Turow. Nothing like the thumb screws to get your own way, naughty naughty EU commission, surely Poland needs that recovery money now, although when you look at the amounts some countries are getting and what they are spending the cash on you soon see it will be the same ones as usual to come out on top whilst the poorer EU nations take another whack and become even more in debt.Im not so sure France have to put in 80billion and are only getting 40 billion back you can imagine how much the uk would have been shafted for if we were still in.
This isn’t really what the original question was about. It is a tad more existential than that - Poland is essentially claiming that the legal basis of a lot of the EU decision making process is null and void as countries have not handed over sovereignty under any treaty and therefore EU law cannot take primacy.
It is interesting that not a single respondent on the thread has advocated a position (backed up by treaty references) that the Poles are wrong.
If the Poles have a valid position (and I am not a lawyer so can’t comment but it would seem that they do) then that would appear to put the EU in a rather precarious place.
Can anyone educate me as to what I am missing and please avoid the squabbles over the EU bureaucracy that happens on other threads.
This all comes down to the treaties Poland signed up to.
If they signed up to X, but now say they meant Y, then someone has to adjudicate, if the court of ajudication is defined in the treaties, then that's the path that must be followed.
I agree with that. The problem is that they haven’t signed up to a treaty that gives the EU legal primacy (as per: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/glossary/primacy_of_eu_law.html)
Therefore on what basis does the EU exert that primacy?"Then the lawyers need to sit down and work out a way forward. The article you quote ( and kudos for actually linking to a source ) notes that the principles have been tested in the courts, and found to be solid. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU has levied a DAILY fine of €1 million on Poland, until the Poles change their position! They also have withheld €57 billion of covid recovery funds due to Poland. This comes on top of a continued daily fine of €500k, due to Poland not closing the huge coal mine at Turow. Nothing like the thumb screws to get your own way, naughty naughty EU commission, surely Poland needs that recovery money now, although when you look at the amounts some countries are getting and what they are spending the cash on you soon see it will be the same ones as usual to come out on top whilst the poorer EU nations take another whack and become even more in debt.Im not so sure France have to put in 80billion and are only getting 40 billion back you can imagine how much the uk would have been shafted for if we were still in.
This isn’t really what the original question was about. It is a tad more existential than that - Poland is essentially claiming that the legal basis of a lot of the EU decision making process is null and void as countries have not handed over sovereignty under any treaty and therefore EU law cannot take primacy.
It is interesting that not a single respondent on the thread has advocated a position (backed up by treaty references) that the Poles are wrong.
If the Poles have a valid position (and I am not a lawyer so can’t comment but it would seem that they do) then that would appear to put the EU in a rather precarious place.
Can anyone educate me as to what I am missing and please avoid the squabbles over the EU bureaucracy that happens on other threads.
You understand it correctly. The German Constitutional Court has made the same point.
A barrister pointed out recently (in the Spectator, I think) that the EU can't claim legal supremacy. it has only ever been ASSUMED that they had supremacy.
And then there is the issue of whether an ultra vires act can be allowed to stand in law.
The difficulty the Poles will face is where the case is justiciable, given the pro-federalist constitution of the ECJ"So effectively what you are saying is that if the judges are predisposed to think they have legal authority they will rule they have authority even if they don’t? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU has levied a DAILY fine of €1 million on Poland, until the Poles change their position! They also have withheld €57 billion of covid recovery funds due to Poland. This comes on top of a continued daily fine of €500k, due to Poland not closing the huge coal mine at Turow. Nothing like the thumb screws to get your own way, naughty naughty EU commission, surely Poland needs that recovery money now, although when you look at the amounts some countries are getting and what they are spending the cash on you soon see it will be the same ones as usual to come out on top whilst the poorer EU nations take another whack and become even more in debt.Im not so sure France have to put in 80billion and are only getting 40 billion back you can imagine how much the uk would have been shafted for if we were still in.
This isn’t really what the original question was about. It is a tad more existential than that - Poland is essentially claiming that the legal basis of a lot of the EU decision making process is null and void as countries have not handed over sovereignty under any treaty and therefore EU law cannot take primacy.
It is interesting that not a single respondent on the thread has advocated a position (backed up by treaty references) that the Poles are wrong.
If the Poles have a valid position (and I am not a lawyer so can’t comment but it would seem that they do) then that would appear to put the EU in a rather precarious place.
Can anyone educate me as to what I am missing and please avoid the squabbles over the EU bureaucracy that happens on other threads.
This all comes down to the treaties Poland signed up to.
If they signed up to X, but now say they meant Y, then someone has to adjudicate, if the court of ajudication is defined in the treaties, then that's the path that must be followed.
I agree with that. The problem is that they haven’t signed up to a treaty that gives the EU legal primacy (as per: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/glossary/primacy_of_eu_law.html)
Therefore on what basis does the EU exert that primacy?
Then the lawyers need to sit down and work out a way forward.
The article you quote ( and kudos for actually linking to a source ) notes that the principles have been tested in the courts, and found to be solid."The problem being that Poland disputes the authority of those very courts. As the link points out this has only been tested on aspects of case law and it does not state that the primacy has passed a fundamental challenge like the Poles are suggesting. That is a much weaker position than I think most people would have assumed (and I also assumed). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU has levied a DAILY fine of €1 million on Poland, until the Poles change their position! They also have withheld €57 billion of covid recovery funds due to Poland. This comes on top of a continued daily fine of €500k, due to Poland not closing the huge coal mine at Turow. Nothing like the thumb screws to get your own way, naughty naughty EU commission, surely Poland needs that recovery money now, although when you look at the amounts some countries are getting and what they are spending the cash on you soon see it will be the same ones as usual to come out on top whilst the poorer EU nations take another whack and become even more in debt.Im not so sure France have to put in 80billion and are only getting 40 billion back you can imagine how much the uk would have been shafted for if we were still in.
This isn’t really what the original question was about. It is a tad more existential than that - Poland is essentially claiming that the legal basis of a lot of the EU decision making process is null and void as countries have not handed over sovereignty under any treaty and therefore EU law cannot take primacy.
It is interesting that not a single respondent on the thread has advocated a position (backed up by treaty references) that the Poles are wrong.
If the Poles have a valid position (and I am not a lawyer so can’t comment but it would seem that they do) then that would appear to put the EU in a rather precarious place.
Can anyone educate me as to what I am missing and please avoid the squabbles over the EU bureaucracy that happens on other threads.
You understand it correctly. The German Constitutional Court has made the same point.
A barrister pointed out recently (in the Spectator, I think) that the EU can't claim legal supremacy. it has only ever been ASSUMED that they had supremacy.
And then there is the issue of whether an ultra vires act can be allowed to stand in law.
The difficulty the Poles will face is where the case is justiciable, given the pro-federalist constitution of the ECJ
So effectively what you are saying is that if the judges are predisposed to think they have legal authority they will rule they have authority even if they don’t?"Yes. They are bound by their own constitution to make findings in the basis of furthering federalism. Most aren't even legally qualified | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU has levied a DAILY fine of €1 million on Poland, until the Poles change their position! They also have withheld €57 billion of covid recovery funds due to Poland. This comes on top of a continued daily fine of €500k, due to Poland not closing the huge coal mine at Turow. Nothing like the thumb screws to get your own way, naughty naughty EU commission, surely Poland needs that recovery money now, although when you look at the amounts some countries are getting and what they are spending the cash on you soon see it will be the same ones as usual to come out on top whilst the poorer EU nations take another whack and become even more in debt.Im not so sure France have to put in 80billion and are only getting 40 billion back you can imagine how much the uk would have been shafted for if we were still in.
This isn’t really what the original question was about. It is a tad more existential than that - Poland is essentially claiming that the legal basis of a lot of the EU decision making process is null and void as countries have not handed over sovereignty under any treaty and therefore EU law cannot take primacy.
It is interesting that not a single respondent on the thread has advocated a position (backed up by treaty references) that the Poles are wrong.
If the Poles have a valid position (and I am not a lawyer so can’t comment but it would seem that they do) then that would appear to put the EU in a rather precarious place.
Can anyone educate me as to what I am missing and please avoid the squabbles over the EU bureaucracy that happens on other threads.
You understand it correctly. The German Constitutional Court has made the same point.
A barrister pointed out recently (in the Spectator, I think) that the EU can't claim legal supremacy. it has only ever been ASSUMED that they had supremacy.
And then there is the issue of whether an ultra vires act can be allowed to stand in law.
The difficulty the Poles will face is where the case is justiciable, given the pro-federalist constitution of the ECJ
So effectively what you are saying is that if the judges are predisposed to think they have legal authority they will rule they have authority even if they don’t?
Yes. They are bound by their own constitution to make findings in the basis of furthering federalism.
Most aren't even legally qualified"Please offer evidence to support your point. Good luck. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU has levied a DAILY fine of €1 million on Poland, until the Poles change their position! They also have withheld €57 billion of covid recovery funds due to Poland. This comes on top of a continued daily fine of €500k, due to Poland not closing the huge coal mine at Turow. Nothing like the thumb screws to get your own way, naughty naughty EU commission, surely Poland needs that recovery money now, although when you look at the amounts some countries are getting and what they are spending the cash on you soon see it will be the same ones as usual to come out on top whilst the poorer EU nations take another whack and become even more in debt.Im not so sure France have to put in 80billion and are only getting 40 billion back you can imagine how much the uk would have been shafted for if we were still in.
This isn’t really what the original question was about. It is a tad more existential than that - Poland is essentially claiming that the legal basis of a lot of the EU decision making process is null and void as countries have not handed over sovereignty under any treaty and therefore EU law cannot take primacy.
It is interesting that not a single respondent on the thread has advocated a position (backed up by treaty references) that the Poles are wrong.
If the Poles have a valid position (and I am not a lawyer so can’t comment but it would seem that they do) then that would appear to put the EU in a rather precarious place.
Can anyone educate me as to what I am missing and please avoid the squabbles over the EU bureaucracy that happens on other threads.
You understand it correctly. The German Constitutional Court has made the same point.
A barrister pointed out recently (in the Spectator, I think) that the EU can't claim legal supremacy. it has only ever been ASSUMED that they had supremacy.
And then there is the issue of whether an ultra vires act can be allowed to stand in law.
The difficulty the Poles will face is where the case is justiciable, given the pro-federalist constitution of the ECJ
So effectively what you are saying is that if the judges are predisposed to think they have legal authority they will rule they have authority even if they don’t?
Yes. They are bound by their own constitution to make findings in the basis of furthering federalism.
Most aren't even legally qualified
Please offer evidence to support your point. Good luck."Please do some reading to support your belief. Research would educate you | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU has levied a DAILY fine of €1 million on Poland, until the Poles change their position! They also have withheld €57 billion of covid recovery funds due to Poland. This comes on top of a continued daily fine of €500k, due to Poland not closing the huge coal mine at Turow. Nothing like the thumb screws to get your own way, naughty naughty EU commission, surely Poland needs that recovery money now, although when you look at the amounts some countries are getting and what they are spending the cash on you soon see it will be the same ones as usual to come out on top whilst the poorer EU nations take another whack and become even more in debt.Im not so sure France have to put in 80billion and are only getting 40 billion back you can imagine how much the uk would have been shafted for if we were still in.
This isn’t really what the original question was about. It is a tad more existential than that - Poland is essentially claiming that the legal basis of a lot of the EU decision making process is null and void as countries have not handed over sovereignty under any treaty and therefore EU law cannot take primacy.
It is interesting that not a single respondent on the thread has advocated a position (backed up by treaty references) that the Poles are wrong.
If the Poles have a valid position (and I am not a lawyer so can’t comment but it would seem that they do) then that would appear to put the EU in a rather precarious place.
Can anyone educate me as to what I am missing and please avoid the squabbles over the EU bureaucracy that happens on other threads.
You understand it correctly. The German Constitutional Court has made the same point.
A barrister pointed out recently (in the Spectator, I think) that the EU can't claim legal supremacy. it has only ever been ASSUMED that they had supremacy.
And then there is the issue of whether an ultra vires act can be allowed to stand in law.
The difficulty the Poles will face is where the case is justiciable, given the pro-federalist constitution of the ECJ
So effectively what you are saying is that if the judges are predisposed to think they have legal authority they will rule they have authority even if they don’t?
Yes. They are bound by their own constitution to make findings in the basis of furthering federalism.
Most aren't even legally qualified
Please offer evidence to support your point. Good luck.
Please do some reading to support your belief. Research would educate you"Sorry, you put the assertion out, it's up to you to provide the evidence to support it. That's how it works. So evidence please. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU has levied a DAILY fine of €1 million on Poland, until the Poles change their position! They also have withheld €57 billion of covid recovery funds due to Poland. This comes on top of a continued daily fine of €500k, due to Poland not closing the huge coal mine at Turow. Nothing like the thumb screws to get your own way, naughty naughty EU commission, surely Poland needs that recovery money now, although when you look at the amounts some countries are getting and what they are spending the cash on you soon see it will be the same ones as usual to come out on top whilst the poorer EU nations take another whack and become even more in debt.Im not so sure France have to put in 80billion and are only getting 40 billion back you can imagine how much the uk would have been shafted for if we were still in.
This isn’t really what the original question was about. It is a tad more existential than that - Poland is essentially claiming that the legal basis of a lot of the EU decision making process is null and void as countries have not handed over sovereignty under any treaty and therefore EU law cannot take primacy.
It is interesting that not a single respondent on the thread has advocated a position (backed up by treaty references) that the Poles are wrong.
If the Poles have a valid position (and I am not a lawyer so can’t comment but it would seem that they do) then that would appear to put the EU in a rather precarious place.
Can anyone educate me as to what I am missing and please avoid the squabbles over the EU bureaucracy that happens on other threads.
You understand it correctly. The German Constitutional Court has made the same point.
A barrister pointed out recently (in the Spectator, I think) that the EU can't claim legal supremacy. it has only ever been ASSUMED that they had supremacy.
And then there is the issue of whether an ultra vires act can be allowed to stand in law.
The difficulty the Poles will face is where the case is justiciable, given the pro-federalist constitution of the ECJ
So effectively what you are saying is that if the judges are predisposed to think they have legal authority they will rule they have authority even if they don’t?
Yes. They are bound by their own constitution to make findings in the basis of furthering federalism.
Most aren't even legally qualified
Please offer evidence to support your point. Good luck.
Please do some reading to support your belief. Research would educate you
Sorry, you put the assertion out, it's up to you to provide the evidence to support it. That's how it works.
So evidence please."The other week when this started in t be news I think someone said it is not in any treaty but possibly in an annexes to one of the treaties. Having said that if the Germans are also questioning it then maybe there is truth in what the poles say | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I feel sure, given the biased nature of the ECJ (above) that the EU will want the row to be adjudicated by the ECJ. The Poles will seek another hearing elsewhere...but where could they go?" Could we do it? We're independent!  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I feel sure, given the biased nature of the ECJ (above) that the EU will want the row to be adjudicated by the ECJ. The Poles will seek another hearing elsewhere...but where could they go? Could we do it? We're independent! "Can just see the French agreeing to that | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I feel sure, given the biased nature of the ECJ (above) that the EU will want the row to be adjudicated by the ECJ. The Poles will seek another hearing elsewhere...but where could they go? Could we do it? We're independent! "We could offer | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Case law everywhere in the world is not written by any Parliament or Government. That is true, right? The ECJ rules on matters of EU law. Not anything else. That is true, right? National courts rule on matters of national law. That is true, right? The German position is based on case law from the 17th century Westphalian system which did not and could not envision any sort of international body or court or legal process. The reality is that the world functions today because there are many such international bodies, courts, and tribunals. Two legal systems have come to a point of disagreement which have been reached logically, in their own ways, over some time. That will be legally resolved. So far, so mundane. Yawn. Poland, however, is doing something deeply political and wrapping it in a legal dispute. There has not been any Polish court ruling Co tradicting EU law or the primacy of the ECJ over European law. The root of this is the Polish judicial system no longer being independent of political interference. The government there has tried several different methods of exerting control over both the judiciary and the press. If the judiciary is no longer independent then you cannot have confidence in doing business, in doing trade. That is true, right? If both the judiciary and the press lose their independence then democracy has a problem. That is true, right? Interested to know which of the points above there is disagreement over. Particularly the last one." The ECJ isn't a proper court. Read what the German Constitutional Court had to say...and learn why it's a kangaroo court | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Case law everywhere in the world is not written by any Parliament or Government. That is true, right? The ECJ rules on matters of EU law. Not anything else. That is true, right? National courts rule on matters of national law. That is true, right? The German position is based on case law from the 17th century Westphalian system which did not and could not envision any sort of international body or court or legal process. The reality is that the world functions today because there are many such international bodies, courts, and tribunals. Two legal systems have come to a point of disagreement which have been reached logically, in their own ways, over some time. That will be legally resolved. So far, so mundane. Yawn. Poland, however, is doing something deeply political and wrapping it in a legal dispute. There has not been any Polish court ruling Co tradicting EU law or the primacy of the ECJ over European law. The root of this is the Polish judicial system no longer being independent of political interference. The government there has tried several different methods of exerting control over both the judiciary and the press. If the judiciary is no longer independent then you cannot have confidence in doing business, in doing trade. That is true, right? If both the judiciary and the press lose their independence then democracy has a problem. That is true, right? Interested to know which of the points above there is disagreement over. Particularly the last one. The ECJ isn't a proper court. Read what the German Constitutional Court had to say...and learn why it's a kangaroo court" Your desperation is palpable. So far you've said that the judges are not legally qualified, no evidence offered Now it's a kangaroo court, no evidence offered. If you can't offer any evidence, anything to back your comments up, it's just hot air and anger. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU should stick to being a trade entity instead of trying to get its nose into all internal matters of its member states. Every country has its own culture, strengths and weaknesses and its laws are framed around these attributes. If an external entity tried to interfere in these matters, it won't end well for the same reason why a world government would never work." They did at the start, it was the Common Market with a Commission. Now it's a dictatorship with a Parliament | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Case law everywhere in the world is not written by any Parliament or Government. That is true, right? The ECJ rules on matters of EU law. Not anything else. That is true, right? National courts rule on matters of national law. That is true, right? The German position is based on case law from the 17th century Westphalian system which did not and could not envision any sort of international body or court or legal process. The reality is that the world functions today because there are many such international bodies, courts, and tribunals. Two legal systems have come to a point of disagreement which have been reached logically, in their own ways, over some time. That will be legally resolved. So far, so mundane. Yawn. Poland, however, is doing something deeply political and wrapping it in a legal dispute. There has not been any Polish court ruling Co tradicting EU law or the primacy of the ECJ over European law. The root of this is the Polish judicial system no longer being independent of political interference. The government there has tried several different methods of exerting control over both the judiciary and the press. If the judiciary is no longer independent then you cannot have confidence in doing business, in doing trade. That is true, right? If both the judiciary and the press lose their independence then democracy has a problem. That is true, right? Interested to know which of the points above there is disagreement over. Particularly the last one. The ECJ isn't a proper court. Read what the German Constitutional Court had to say...and learn why it's a kangaroo court" Well, by my reading of this, you didn't answer any of these points directly. You just made an unrelated and unproven, emotive, allegation. Very unlegallistic
Rather that, how about addressing what was written? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Case law everywhere in the world is not written by any Parliament or Government. That is true, right? The ECJ rules on matters of EU law. Not anything else. That is true, right? National courts rule on matters of national law. That is true, right? The German position is based on case law from the 17th century Westphalian system which did not and could not envision any sort of international body or court or legal process. The reality is that the world functions today because there are many such international bodies, courts, and tribunals. Two legal systems have come to a point of disagreement which have been reached logically, in their own ways, over some time. That will be legally resolved. So far, so mundane. Yawn. Poland, however, is doing something deeply political and wrapping it in a legal dispute. There has not been any Polish court ruling Co tradicting EU law or the primacy of the ECJ over European law. The root of this is the Polish judicial system no longer being independent of political interference. The government there has tried several different methods of exerting control over both the judiciary and the press. If the judiciary is no longer independent then you cannot have confidence in doing business, in doing trade. That is true, right? If both the judiciary and the press lose their independence then democracy has a problem. That is true, right? Interested to know which of the points above there is disagreement over. Particularly the last one. The ECJ isn't a proper court. Read what the German Constitutional Court had to say...and learn why it's a kangaroo court Well, by my reading of this, you didn't answer any of these points directly. You just made an unrelated and unproven, emotive, allegation. Very unlegallistic
Rather that, how about addressing what was written?"Read it again | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU has levied a DAILY fine of €1 million on Poland, until the Poles change their position! They also have withheld €57 billion of covid recovery funds due to Poland. This comes on top of a continued daily fine of €500k, due to Poland not closing the huge coal mine at Turow. Nothing like the thumb screws to get your own way, naughty naughty EU commission, surely Poland needs that recovery money now, although when you look at the amounts some countries are getting and what they are spending the cash on you soon see it will be the same ones as usual to come out on top whilst the poorer EU nations take another whack and become even more in debt.Im not so sure France have to put in 80billion and are only getting 40 billion back you can imagine how much the uk would have been shafted for if we were still in.
This isn’t really what the original question was about. It is a tad more existential than that - Poland is essentially claiming that the legal basis of a lot of the EU decision making process is null and void as countries have not handed over sovereignty under any treaty and therefore EU law cannot take primacy.
It is interesting that not a single respondent on the thread has advocated a position (backed up by treaty references) that the Poles are wrong.
If the Poles have a valid position (and I am not a lawyer so can’t comment but it would seem that they do) then that would appear to put the EU in a rather precarious place.
Can anyone educate me as to what I am missing and please avoid the squabbles over the EU bureaucracy that happens on other threads.
You understand it correctly. The German Constitutional Court has made the same point.
A barrister pointed out recently (in the Spectator, I think) that the EU can't claim legal supremacy. it has only ever been ASSUMED that they had supremacy.
And then there is the issue of whether an ultra vires act can be allowed to stand in law.
The difficulty the Poles will face is where the case is justiciable, given the pro-federalist constitution of the ECJ"Hmmm wasn’t one of the big ticket items driving Brexit sovereignty and supremacy of UK law? (That’s rhetorical BTW). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Case law everywhere in the world is not written by any Parliament or Government. That is true, right? The ECJ rules on matters of EU law. Not anything else. That is true, right? National courts rule on matters of national law. That is true, right? The German position is based on case law from the 17th century Westphalian system which did not and could not envision any sort of international body or court or legal process. The reality is that the world functions today because there are many such international bodies, courts, and tribunals. Two legal systems have come to a point of disagreement which have been reached logically, in their own ways, over some time. That will be legally resolved. So far, so mundane. Yawn. Poland, however, is doing something deeply political and wrapping it in a legal dispute. There has not been any Polish court ruling Co tradicting EU law or the primacy of the ECJ over European law. The root of this is the Polish judicial system no longer being independent of political interference. The government there has tried several different methods of exerting control over both the judiciary and the press. If the judiciary is no longer independent then you cannot have confidence in doing business, in doing trade. That is true, right? If both the judiciary and the press lose their independence then democracy has a problem. That is true, right? Interested to know which of the points above there is disagreement over. Particularly the last one. The ECJ isn't a proper court. Read what the German Constitutional Court had to say...and learn why it's a kangaroo court Well, by my reading of this, you didn't answer any of these points directly. You just made an unrelated and unproven, emotive, allegation. Very unlegallistic
Rather that, how about addressing what was written?
Read it again""The ECJ isn't a proper court" "it's a kangaroo court" Neither stated by the German constitutional court. O ly by you
Any of the direct questions about the legal and political points that were raised answered?
Not one. Zero. Try again or don't try at all, but don't claim that you are doing something that you are not, or understand something that you do not. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Never been a fan of how the EU is run. With all those cultures and differing population sizes it was asking for trouble expecting it would be fair for everyone. Poland should just leave the EU." It won’t, the EU is very popular in Poland | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Never been a fan of how the EU is run. With all those cultures and differing population sizes it was asking for trouble expecting it would be fair for everyone. Poland should just leave the EU." Because that will benefit Poland how, exactly? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Never been a fan of how the EU is run. With all those cultures and differing population sizes it was asking for trouble expecting it would be fair for everyone. Poland should just leave the EU." I know. Just like London or Manchester. Really dumb thing to do and a horrible idea. Much better to have a monoculture. We should have segregated areas and compete with each other  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Never been a fan of how the EU is run. With all those cultures and differing population sizes it was asking for trouble expecting it would be fair for everyone. Poland should just leave the EU." I can't see that happening, not in the near future if at all. They may kick off about certain things to make a point but I think their fate is sealed | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Never been a fan of how the EU is run. With all those cultures and differing population sizes it was asking for trouble expecting it would be fair for everyone. Poland should just leave the EU. Because that will benefit Poland how, exactly?" They just have to look at how well the UK is doing since brexit | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
