#2 Essay Site on Sitejabber
info@theunitutor.com
+44 20 8638 6541
  • 中文 (中国)
  • English GB
  • English AU
  • English US
  • العربية (Arabic)

Camila’s Case

Research Paper

Date

1030 Words

Student’s Name

Institution’s Name

Introduction to the Case

Camila’s case regards implementing the Parental Leave Assistance Fund (PLAF) Directive by the Spanish Government. The European Union (EU) and the European Parliament adopted the PLAF directive in January 2019. The directive requires EU member states to implement a system that will provide additional funding to new parents who take parental leave during the first year of childbirth or adoption. Employers are required to pay their employees the additional funds and claim the same from their respective governments. The directive was aimed to support new parents who are employed and encourage parents to take parental leaves.

The Spanish Government is yet to implement the PLAF directive. The Government cites constitutional issues regarding Catalonia region as the cause of delayed implementation of the EU directive. Camila just adopted a child and went on parental leave. She asked her employer, a local private school in Madrid, to pay her additional funds per the EU directives. The employer declined to do the same citing the Spanish Government’s failure to implement the PLAF directive. The scenario raises legal issues that need to be decided by courts.

Legal Issues Raised by the Scenario

Two key legal issues arise from the scenario. The first issue is Camila’s failure to get additional financial assistance due to the Spanish Government’s failure to implement the PLAF directive. The directive extends a new right to new parents in EU member states. The new right is the enjoyment of additional financing while on parental leave. Spain is an EU member state. The Spanish Government’s failure denies Camila, a new parent, the new right. The denial raises legal concerns.

The second legal issue arising from the scenario is the Spanish Government’s failure to implement an EU directive. EU’s directives often provide a timeline for taking actions regarding the implementation of the same by member states. A member state that does not take the necessary action within the set implementation period does not fully comply with the directive, and legal issues can arise.

Legal Action that Might be Taken

One party in the scenario who can take legal action is Camila. Camila can take action against the Spanish Government for failure to implement the EU directive that would have granted her additional financial assistance as a new parent. The Spanish Government is a party to the EU treaty and should implement adopted EU directives. The failure to take action necessary to implement the PLAF directive exposes the Spanish Government to legal action. Camila cannot take legal action against her employer since the directive does not apply to the employer. EU directives apply to member states. She could sue the employer if the Spanish Government has adopted legislation that requires employers to make the additional payments, and the employer fails to do the same.

Another party that can take legal action is the EU. The EU can sue the Spanish Government in the European Court of Justice to fully comply with its directive. The Spanish Government has failed to implement a system that would ensure implementing the PLAF directive in Spain. The failure is ground for legal action.

Direct effect

The direct effect refers to a mechanism that enables an individual or company in an EU member state to take legal action in national courts against a member state/individual employer/organization if they are denied a right granted by EU law or in case of an act contrary to the EU law1. The direct effect mechanism applies even in cases involving EU directives. However, Camila cannot use the direct effect mechanism to sue the Spanish Government or her employer for their failure to uphold the PLAF directive. The direct effect mechanism has several criteria. A treaty’s provisions are directly effective if they are clear and precise, unconditional, and requires no further implementation2. The PLAF directive does not fulfil the third condition. The Spanish Government needs to take further action to implement the directive. Further action is creating a system that will ensure the provision of additional financial support to new parents taking parental leave. The Government has not taken such action.

Indirect effect

Another means that can be used to drive EU member states to harmonize their laws with those of the EU is the indirect effect tool. An indirect effect is an interpretive tool applied by courts of EU member states in cases where national law conflicts with an EU directive3. The point of using the tool is to ensure consistency and harmony between EU law and national law. The tool does not apply in the case involving Camila, her employer, the Spanish Government, and the EU. There is no Spanish law that conflicts with the PLAF directive. Thus, the interpretive tool cannot force the Spanish Government to implement a system that will help implement the directive.

State Liability

State liability is another mean of driving EU member states to implement EU laws. State liability regards making nations liable to the damages suffered by natural or legal individuals (companies) due to their failure to comply with one or more provisions of EU laws4. State liability helps ensure that member states protect EU given rights. State liability does not apply in Camila’s case. Camila does not appear to have suffered damages due to the Spanish Government’s failure to implement the PLAF directive. Camila’s employer also has not suffered damages due to the Government’s failure to implement the directive. Thus, the means of enforcement would not help motivate the Spanish Government to implement PLAF.

Enforcement Actions

Direct effect, indirect effect, and state liability cannot help compel the Spanish Government to implement the PLAF directive. The best means to compel the Spanish Government to implement the directive is through enforcement action. The European Commission can bring the matter to the Court of Justice of the European Union to compel the Spanish Government to implement the directive5. An EU member state can also take the Spanish Government to the same court to compel it to take the necessary action to implement the PLAF directive. The European Commission is the body best-suited to take action against the Spanish Government in the PLAF matter.

Reference List

Hofmann A, ‘Is The Commission Levelling The Playing Field? Rights Enforcement In The European Union’ (2018) 40 Journal of European Integration

Muse H, ‘The Supremacy Doctrine, Direct, And Indirect Effects And State Liability Under EU Law’ [2020] SSRN Electronic Journal


  1. Hassen Mama Muse, ‘The Supremacy Doctrine, Direct, And Indirect Effects And State Liability Under EU Law’ [2020] SSRN Electronic Journal.↩︎

  2. Hassen Mama Muse, ‘The Supremacy Doctrine, Direct, And Indirect Effects And State Liability Under EU Law’ [2020] SSRN Electronic Journal.↩︎

  3. Hassen Mama Muse, ‘The Supremacy Doctrine, Direct, And Indirect Effects And State Liability Under EU Law’ [2020] SSRN Electronic Journal.↩︎

  4. Hassen Mama Muse, ‘The Supremacy Doctrine, Direct, And Indirect Effects And State Liability Under EU Law’ [2020] SSRN Electronic Journal.↩︎

  5. Andreas Hofmann, ‘Is The Commission Levelling The Playing Field? Rights Enforcement In The European Union’ (2018) 40 Journal of European Integration.↩︎


How The Order Process Works

Amazing Offers from The Uni Tutor
Sign up to our daily deals and don't miss out!

The Uni Tutor Clients