In light of the 20th anniversary of the ruling in Francovich, Michael Haba analyzes the principle of Member State Liability, which provides a right to damages whenever EU law is breached by Member States. His research ascertains that the doctrine evolved through three stages before becoming the unified approach that it is today. The author emphasizes that the principle’s base lay at the outset of the EEC, when the ECJ sought means to foster the enforcement of EC law. He shows that although State Liability was introduced in Francovich, there was not enough guidance on its application. He highlights that these matters were resolved in Brasserie/Factortame III, which refined the assessment of culpability, but was inconsistent and had to be further clarified in case law. He illustrates that the doctrine was expanded to breaches of EC law by last instance courts in Köbler. Finally, the author examines if breaches of European competition rules could lead to a right to damages under the principle, but concludes that no fourth stage of State Liability can be established.

This research comprises of two parts. The first part analyses the most important issues of the principle of Member State's liability in damages for the breach of European Union law: legal basis of the principle, requirements for liability and, lastly, recent developments in the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The principle of Member State's liability in damages and the requirements of liability are being further developed by the Court in its modern jurisprudence. These cases show that the requirements of liability were clarified and the scope of application of the principle of Member State's liability broadened. The author also examines that the state liability is being recognised both in EU and international law. State responsibility in international law can be understood in a broad sense and a narrow sense. It is emphasized that in a broad sense, state responsibility in international law comprises three institutes: firstly, state responsibility for internationally wrongful acts; secondly, state responsibility for the damage caused by lawful acts.

This is the first book to present an in-depth discussion of the right of individuals to receive damages in European law. Analyzing relevant ECJ cases, the authors detail the substantive and procedural criteria that need to be satisfied in order for an individual to succeed in a claim for damages against Community institutions under Article 288 EC or against a defaulting Member State under the court-created Francovich principle.

Over the last 15 years, Köbler liability has resulted in the allocation of damages on only five occasions. Why is that? And what are the practical implications of the Köbler judgment in the Member States? This book offers a unique analysis of the principle – not from the usual EU-focused point of view but from the view of the practical Member State – and thus follows the track set by earlier books in the 'EU Law in the Member States' series. It thoroughly examines the national jurisprudential and legislative acceptation of the state liability principle and explores the existence of alternative remedies available in the Member States in case of such breaches. The conclusions, based on a systematic assessment of 300 national judgments from the 28 Member States, lead to a reconsideration of the role of the Köbler doctrine in the system of judicial remedies against violation of EU law by national supreme courts. After the pronouncement of the ECJ judgment in Köbler, legal scholars and practitioners have forecast the eradication of the principle of res judicata and the endangering of judicial independence. The judgment caused a lot of ink to flow; according to the ECJ's records, at least 100 studies are directly devoted to the analysis of this decision. This book is, however, the first to offer a comprehensive analysis on the genuine life of the Köbler liability in the Member States.

"Over the last 15 years, Köbler liability has resulted in the allocation of damages on only five occasions. Why is that? And what are the practical implications of the Köbler judgment in the Member States? This book offers a unique analysis of the principle - not from the usual EU-focused point of view but from the view of the practical Member State - and thus follows the track set by earlier books in the 'EU Law in the Member States' series. It thoroughly examines the national jurisprudential and legislative acceptation of the state liability principle and explores the existence of alternative remedies available in the Member States in case of such breaches. The conclusions, based on a systematic assessment of 300 national judgments from the 28 Member States, lead to a reconsideration of the role of the Köbler doctrine in the system of judicial remedies against violation of EU law by national supreme courts. After the pronouncement of the ECJ judgment in Köbler, legal scholars and practitioners have forecast the eradication of the principle of res judicata and the endangering of judicial independence. The judgment caused a lot of ink to flow; according to the ECJ's records, at least 100 studies are directly devoted to the analysis of this decision. This book is, however, the first to offer a comprehensive analysis on the genuine life of the Köbler liability principle in the Member States"--

The last decade has seen an evisceration of the once-dominant democratic legal concept of "public interest". Its place is being steadily usurped by a problematic "compensation culture" which, in an ostensible effort to protect the individual, is wreaking havoc with the principles of responsibility and liability that underlie the rule of law, especially in the commercial context. Nowhere is this troubling development more evident than in the jurisprudence surrounding Article 288(2)EC, which has grown from a measure of sanction against the Community Institutions for maladministration into a remedy for infraction or injury through the fault of those Institutions or, by extension, as a result of Member State breach of Community law. Judicial Protection in the EC is the first in-depth analysis of this "hot spot" in EC law. With prodigious scholarship and persuasiveness, the author investigates the relevant case law of the Court of Justice from the standpoint of the fundamental legal principles involved. She finds that the distinct problem of the accountability of the Community Institutions, so important where democratic controls are weak, has been subsumed to the responsibility to compensate. In her penetrating commentary she identifies an erosion of basic democratic principles and points the way to ensuring that policies claimed to be in the public interest actually serve that public interest. Cases examined in detail include the "Isoglucose" cases, Brasserie, Factortame, SchandÖppenstedt, Bergaderm, LandÜtticke, and Eurocoton. The author refers extensively to the ECSC Treaty which, although it expires in July 2002, continues to provide significant authority for the interpretation of Article 288(2)EC.