Darren Harvey
Dr Darren Harvey is a Senior Lecturer in Law and Director of Undergraduate Studies at The Dickson Poon School of Law, King’s College London. Prior to joining King’s, Dr Harvey was an Early Career Fellow in EU law at Edinburgh Law School. He wrote his doctoral thesis on constitutional review by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) at the University of Cambridge. Before writing his thesis, Darren worked as a research assistant to Prof. Thomas Giegerich at the Jean Monnet Chair of European Union Law and European Integration. Darren holds a Master of Laws (LLM) degree in European Law from the Europa Institut at Saarland University, and an LLB (Hons) from Edinburgh Law School. Darren has published widely on many different areas of EU law. He has taught a wide range of EU law and Public Law courses at both undergraduate and postgraduate level. In 2018, he was a Stagiaire in the cabinet of Judge Ian Forrester at the General Court of the CJEU.
Practice Area
Panel
- Contributing Author
Education
- University of Cambridge (2019)
- Europa Institut, Saarland LLM (2013)
- University of Edinburgh, LLB (2011)
5 Contributions by Darren Harvey
PRACTICE NOTES
Challenging EU Directives: Annulment, Preliminary References and Plea of Illegality (TFEU 263, 267, 277): Admissibility, Standing, Grounds, Interim Relief and Appeals
In brief
Settled case law makes clear that only the Court of Justice of the European Union has authority to declare an EU act invalid. Under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the validity of an EU Directive can be contested in several ways:
by filing a direct action for annulment before the Court of Justice under Article 263 TFEU;
by challenging the Directive’s validity indirectly in proceedings before a national court. Such proceedings are aimed at the national measures used to transpose the Directive, and the national court may request the Court of Justice to examine the Directive’s validity via the preliminary reference route in Article 267 TFEU;
by invoking a collateral challenge under Article 277 TFEU (plea of illegality) attached to a principal direct action brought under Article 263 TFEU.
Direct action for annulment
Cases brought under Article 263 TFEU must satisfy both admissibility conditions and the substantive grounds for annulment...
EU Law
PRACTICE NOTES
EU Competence Framework: Conferral, Legal Bases, Division of Powers, Subsidiarity, Proportionality, Implied Powers and Article 352 TFEU
The first iteration of this note was prepared by the late Professor Alexander Türk.
The limits of EU competences
The scope of EU competences is defined by the principle of conferral (also called the principle of attributed powers). This principle safeguards against the Union stretching its authority beyond what the Treaties grant. As set out in Article 5(2) of the Treaty on European Union, the Union acts solely within competences bestowed on it by the Member States to achieve the Treaties’ objectives, while competences not granted to the EU remain with the Member States.
A further facet of conferral concerns the division of competences among the EU institutions. Article 13(2) TEU provides that each institution operates only within the powers the Treaties confer upon it.
The fact that the EU holds the capacity to intervene in a given field does not confer general law‑making power on its institutions. They may act only to the extent that specific powers have been attributed to them...
EU Law
PRACTICE NOTES
EU free movement of workers and citizens: worker definition, scope, restrictions and justifications, derivative residence and equal treatment under Articles 45 and 21 TFEU and Directive 2004/38/EC
EU workers and EU citizens benefit from freedom of movement. This entitlement is set out for workers in Article 45 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and for citizens in Article 21 TFEU. Detailed rules on the conditions and limits appear in Directive 2004/38/EC. They may move to and live in other Member States without discrimination, and any curb on this right must pursue a public interest and be proportionate to the restriction applied.
Free movement of workers
Article 45 TFEU allows EU workers to circulate across the Union. It outlaws discrimination based on nationality in respect of employment and working conditions, including remuneration.
Scope of the protection
Personal scope
The Court of Justice of the European Union retains the authority to determine which persons fall within Article 45 TFEU, as the Treaty’s objectives could be undermined if national law could set and change such definitions unilaterally. In Lawrie-Blum,...
EU Law
PRACTICE NOTES
EU internal market four freedoms: goods, services, establishment and capital—scope, restrictions, justifications, market access, proportionality and key CJEU case law
In brief
The free movement of goods, the freedom to provide services, the freedom of establishment, and the free movement of capital (collectively, the ‘four freedoms’) operate as constraints imposed by the EU Treaties upon EU Member States to secure the overall functioning of the EU Internal Market. This variety of negative integration has clear limits. Most domestic restrictions falling within the reach of the four freedoms can, however, be justified, provided such restrictions are proportionate. While the Court of Justice has assumed a particularly important and significant role in interpreting the four freedoms (and their limits), any remaining national barriers can ultimately only ever be removed through harmonisation measures enacted by the EU (‘positive’ integration). For further reading on this, see Practice Note: Harmonisation. This Practice Note examines the four freedoms underpinning the EU Internal Market in greater detail.
Free movement of goods
Restriction on imports
Scope of the prohibition
Article 34 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) prohibits ‘quantitative restrictions on imports and all measures having equivalent effect’. The phrase ‘quantitative restrictions’ was described by the Court of Justice in Geddo as ‘measures which amount to a total or partial restraint of…imports, exports’...
EU Law
PRACTICE NOTES
EU Law Proportionality: Definition, Three-stage Test, Evidence Requirements and Intensity of Review for Member States and EU Institutions
This note’s initial iteration was authored by the late Professor Alexander Türk.
Definition of proportionality
Under the principle of proportionality, action taken by the EU and by member states must not extend beyond what is strictly necessary to secure the objectives sought, and should be confined to measures needed to achieve those aims. The Court of Justice of the European Union has affirmed proportionality as a general principle of EU law. The court’s test for reviewing a measure’s proportionality stems from continental law, with particular roots in the German legal tradition.
Use of the principle of proportionality against EU member states
The principle of proportionality can be invoked against member states when they act within the scope of EU law, notably where they restrict the free movement rights conferred by EU law. For background reading, see Practice Note: The four freedoms-goods, services, establishment and capital. Even if a restrictive measure pursues a legitimate aim, a member state is obliged to demonstrate that the action adopted is proportionate to the objective pursued. In this context, proportionality operates as an instrument of market integration, limiting member state action within the scope of EU law and requiring national authorities to justify their conduct...
EU Law
If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.
