While the EU remains an attractive proposition for other European countries, such as the recent addition of Latvia as a Member State, the UK however does not regard Europe as a flourishing economy that it joined 40 years ago.
It is no secret that the euro-zone has suffered an economic crisis. This has lead to a lack of dynamism between Europe and the UK as countries that use the single currency are bound tighter together, leaving the British people insecure with regards to uncontrolled immigration issues and single EU market demands. Eurosceptics believe the UK should withdraw from the EU despite a lack of precedence for such an event. However, political leaders are of the opinion that the UK does not require to leave the EU but rather review the terms of EU relationship altogether.
This paper therefore contributes to the research of public international law by examining the issues surrounding the supremacy of the EU within the UK as a Member State, the withdrawal of the UK, with a view to its success and consequences/risks involved, the withdrawal process in terms of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty and the options available for the UK to continue its relationship with the EU or consider an EFTA or EEA relationship much to that of its counterparts such as Norway or to leave both the EU and the single market altogether, but attempt to recreate a free-trade relationship through bilateral agreements, similar to that of the Swiss model.
This research will therefore demonstrate the UK’s position as an EU member and the challenges the UK faces with regards to its stability and future as a country within the global financial economy.
Table of Contents
Chapter 1. Introduction
1.1 Scope
1.2 Outcome
Chapter 2. The role of EU, its purpose and effects on the UK’s legal system
2.1 The EU - European Community - European Communities
2.2 The accession of the UK to the EU
2.3 Historical development of the European Community & European Community law
2.4 The nature of the EU
2.5 Supremacy of the EU
2.6 Supremacy of the EU over the UK
Chapter 3. The EU assisted the UK for the better
3.1 EU supremacy assisted the UK for a greater and stronger EU internal market
3.2 The EU’s effect on the UK
3.3 The procedure to withdraw from EU membership
3.4 The UK’s Options
3.5 The effect of leaving the EU on businesses in the UK
3.5.1 Argument against the withdrawal of the UK
3.5.2 Argument for the withdrawal of the UK
3.5.3 An alternate option
3.5.4 Impact on the world
Chapter 4. The separation of the UK from the EU
4.1 The withdrawal process
4.1.1 The EU and UK withdrawal agreement
4.1.2 Implementations of the withdrawal agreement in the UK
4.1.3 The rights of businesses and individuals – follow the Greenland example
4.1.4 The EFTA or EEA as an option
4.1.5 Define the EFTA & EEA
4.2 The Norwegian or Swiss model
4.2.1 Norwegian Model
4.2.2 Swiss Model
4.2.3 A renegotiation of terms
4.2.4 Conclusion
Objectives and Research Themes
This dissertation investigates the legal and economic implications of the United Kingdom withdrawing from the European Union, specifically addressing the conflict between national parliamentary sovereignty and the doctrine of EU legal supremacy. The research explores the viability of alternative models—such as the EEA, EFTA, or bespoke bilateral arrangements similar to the Swiss model—to determine whether the UK would benefit from maintaining or altering its current relationship with the EU.
- The constitutional impact of EU supremacy on the UK legal system.
- The procedural requirements for withdrawal under Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty.
- Comparative analysis of the Norwegian and Swiss models as alternative frameworks.
- Economic consequences for UK businesses, including trade access and regulatory compliance.
Excerpt from the Book
2.6 Supremacy of the EU over the UK
To give effect to EU law it was necessary for the UK to ratify EU law within its domestic legal system, by Parliament adopting EU law and promulgating the European Communities Act 1972 (‘EC Act 1972’). Section 2(1) of the EC Act 1972 provides that all directly effective EU law will be automatically enforceable upon UK Courts60 to the extent that “All such rights, powers, liabilities, obligations and restrictions…and all such remedies and procedures…as in accordance with the Treaties are without further enactment to be given legal effect or used in the United Kingdom shall be recognized and available in law and be enforced, allowed and followed accordingly…’61
However there is an underlying problem in the UK’s acceptance of EU law as supreme law and that is the constitutional doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty. This doctrine states that “Parliament is the supreme legal authority in the UK which can create or end any law”62 It is a legal norm that UK courts cannot overrule legislation of Parliament, and no Parliament can pass laws that future Parliament may not change. While the EC Act 1972 has imposed an obligation on the UK courts to act in accordance with EU law, Parliament can still repeal said Act.
In the series of the Factortame63 cases the ECJ ruled that under the terms of the EC 1972 Act it was the duty of the UK courts, when delivering judgment in a case, to override any rule of national law found to be in conflict with directly enforceable and applicable EU law. The significance of the Factortame64 cases are that the supremacy of EU law over national law of the UK is only recognized where EU law has competence over the UK legal system.
Summary of Chapters
Chapter 1. Introduction: Outlines the scope of the research and the legal context of the European Union, emphasizing the importance of Treaties in establishing the relationship between Member States and the Union.
Chapter 2. The role of EU, its purpose and effects on the UK’s legal system: Analyzes the development of the EU, its legal nature, and the established doctrine of supremacy, specifically focusing on its impact within the UK legal framework.
Chapter 3. The EU assisted the UK for the better: Examines the economic advantages and collaborative benefits of EU membership while detailing the procedural complexities and potential arguments regarding a possible UK withdrawal.
Chapter 4. The separation of the UK from the EU: Investigates the formal withdrawal process under Article 50 TEU, the legal challenges of negotiating new terms, and an evaluation of alternative relationships like the Norwegian or Swiss models.
Keywords
EU supremacy, EEA relationship, EU member state, withdrawal, parliamentary sovereignty, Lisbon Treaty, EFTA, Swiss model, Norwegian model, common market, European Communities Act 1972, trade agreements, legal heritage, economic integration.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this dissertation?
The dissertation examines the legal and political relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union, specifically looking at the doctrine of supremacy and the implications of a potential UK withdrawal.
What are the central thematic areas?
The core themes include the clash between EU law and UK parliamentary sovereignty, the withdrawal procedure under Article 50, and the economic pros and cons of exiting the single market.
What is the research's primary goal?
The goal is to determine if the UK's sovereignty concerns are significant enough to warrant leaving the EU, and if so, which alternative relationship model would best serve the nation's interests.
Which methodology is applied in this research?
The work utilizes a legal analysis approach, reviewing EU Treaties, case law (such as Factortame and Cassis de Dijon), and existing research on membership models to reach a conclusion.
What does the main body cover?
The main body covers the history of the UK’s accession, the legal supremacy of EU law, the arguments for and against withdrawal, and the practicalities of transitioning to models like the Swiss or Norwegian arrangements.
Which keywords characterize the work?
Key terms include EU supremacy, EEA relationship, withdrawal, parliamentary sovereignty, and the Norwegian and Swiss models.
How does the author interpret the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty in relation to EU law?
The author highlights the conflict between the legal norm that no UK Parliament can bind its successors and the obligation of UK courts to enforce EU law under the European Communities Act 1972.
What insight does the Greenland example provide?
The Greenland example is used to demonstrate how a territory can manage the rights of businesses and individuals during the withdrawal process from the European Communities.
Why might the Swiss model be considered both attractive and problematic for the UK?
It is attractive because it offers flexibility and bilateral agreements, but problematic because it requires the UK to follow EU market regulations without having a vote in their creation.
What is the author's final conclusion regarding the UK’s position?
The author concludes that while the UK has concerns regarding supremacy, staying within the EU—with potential negotiation for reform—remains more secure for its economic and international standing than an uncertain withdrawal.
- Citar trabajo
- Pranushka Naidoo (Autor), 2014, Should the UK leave the EU or consider an EEA relationship? A question of supremacy, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/298325
