e principles of EU law within its borders and since there is no distinction between citizens and non-citizens in its provisions, then UK is bound to apply all EU laws without discrimination on all persons subject to its jurisdiction.
Under international law, a state has prescriptive jurisdiction or authority to apply its national laws on all persons within its jurisdiction, regardless of the nationality of persons. The application of this authority within its territory is exclusive and absolute but may be subject to such concept as exterritoriality, usually in the form of diplomatic immunity. This authority may also be extended outside of its territory under the extraterritoriality principle subject to the grant of authority by another state (Dixon 143-144, 146). Since Gabrielle was a worker in UK prior to her death with a valid working visa, she was subject to its jurisdiction. Thus, under the EU law she was supposed to be subject to its protection by implication and extension. Her mere presence within the UK jurisdiction entitled her to the rights reserved under the EU law. The same was true in the case of Karl while he was temporarily in UK under a tourist visa. His presence within the country’s jurisdiction had entitled him to protection under the EU law. In the event of failure of the UK government to protect them as provided by the terms of the EU Charter, gives them the right to file a complaint before the European Court of Justice. The usual procedure is for individual litigants to challenge in the country’s courts the failure of the State to apply Community law and if the court needs assistance to rule on the issue before it, it may refer the matter to the European Court of Justice under Article 234 of the EC Treaty (Weatherill 2007 95).
In line with the above, Gabrielle could have gone to a UK court to file a complaint against her employers for their discriminatory treatment re her salary. Under the Article 15 of the European Charter, “nationals