Inspired by questions US courts and American scholarship ask when confronted with the domestic enforcement of international agreements, this article looks at the methods of interpretation and tests used by the CJEU in its ‘direct effect’ analysis of international agreements, which are binding on the EU, as well as the issue of ‘rights’ and its role in the ‘direct effect’ analysis. It is argued that the current case-law is split when it comes to the methods of interpretation and tests used in the ‘direct effect’ analysis. Moreover, the CJEU’s case-law is not clear on whether a primary right or the right to seek a remedy needs to be conferred by international agreements, or whether a right should be conferred at all.
|Journal||European Law Review|
|Publication status||Published - 2014|