***THE QUESTION IS IN ASSIGNMENT CRITERIA*** - Essay Example

This is what has happened with the British government. When Member States want to annul offending legislation, their best cause of action is to proceed via Art. 230. This Article provides for the judicial review of the legality of Community acts by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and is therefore a direct mechanism through which the validity of Community acts can be questioned. If Britain is successful in its Art. 230 action, the offending Directive will be annulled and the Directive will have no legal effects and as such will no longer exist.

There are certain requirements that must be fulfilled in order for Art. 230 to be available. Firstly, it is a process whereby only acts of the European Community institutions having legal effects are judicially reviewed. This is not a problem for the British government as the enactment of a Directive by the European Council clearly falls into this criterion. A major limitation of Art. 230 is its locus standi requirement. Just like judicial review in national courts, in the European Community too the applicant must have standing in order to question the validity of Community legislation and other legal acts.

This requirement of standing is very strict in the context of Art. 230, but as Member States such as Britain are privileged applicants (as apparent from the wording of the Article), they are presumed to have sufficient legal interest and therefore automatic locus standi. However, Art. 230 has a time limit of two months. If Britain wants to proceed under this Article, as per Art. 230(5) the Directive must have been published or come to its notice less than two months ago. If the time limit has not expired and the claim is admissible, the next requirement is that there must be a ground on which the offending Directive can be invalidated.

There are four grounds for annulment in Art 230(2) and as