Talk:Indirect effect

Indirect effect is not as rigid as the original author implies - it does not override domestive law, it simply places an burden upon domestic courts to interpret statutes in line with the directive. Certainly, where there is a direct conflict between EC Law and domestic law, EC law is supreme - the supremacy principle - however this principle has its roots in direct effect. Supremacy is only an issue when a measure is directly effective - this is because it is the claimant who will be relying on the EC law. In the case of directives the claimant cannot rely on the directive being able to override domestic law since the claimant will not be able to resort to the directive to further their case.

Supremacy - which does override domestic law - is a consequence of direct effect.

Also - the seciton on IE and individuals should perhaps relate how IE is a solution to the problem faced by directives and HDE. The text in the article would be better placed in the direct effect article. --Heatley 18:45, Aug 22, 2004 (UTC)

I Edited the introduction to make it in line with what I belive to be the core of indirect effect. Will.S 20:23 11.03.06 2006

I totally agree. This article has got indirect effect completely arse-ways. Ratti has nothing to do indirect effect. But why didn't either of you change the article when it was so obviously wrong?? — Blue-Haired Lawyer ^t 14:19, 3 September 2011 (UTC)