I have a problem question on EU law but got stuck!
I was given a fictional scenario which provided that the EU adopted an environmental health Directive Which required every state to set up a scheme to fund training grants for environmental health officers.
It provided that the grant shall be available to all environmental health officers aged 25 and under at the time of application, and works for an organisation that employs 25 or more.
However, the UK implemented the Directive, but provided that the grant would be available to environmental health officers employed in an organisation employing more than 25.
Alice applied as an environmental officer,( her company employs 25 people) but was denied on grounds that She is not a senior environmental officer and her company employs only 25.
Alice would have been entitled to a 3% pay rise(from her company) if she had succeeded in securing the grant
I applied the Van Gend criteria, but got confused as to whether the directive is capable of direct effect given that it requires a further act of implementation.2) For a directive to be directly effective, the implementation period should have lapsed. But in this case, it was implemented, but not in line with the intent of the EU. The UK provision, is contrary to the wording of the EU Directive.
Is the directive capable of direct effect, regardless of the 3rd Van Gend criteria not being met.
I don't think indirect effect is applicable here, but I stand corrected. Possibly state liability as an alternative form of enforcement?
More law resources on TSR