Levez v Jennings (Harlow Pools) Ltd (Case C-326/96) [1998] ECR I-7835

Facts

  • The case concerned the compatibility of national procedural rules, specifically time limits for bringing legal actions, with effective judicial protection of EU law rights.
  • Levez questioned whether a national limitation period undermined the ability to enforce rights conferred by EU law.
  • The European Court of Justice (ECJ) examined national courts’ obligations regarding the interplay between national time limits and the requirement to ensure EU rights are fully effective.
  • The dispute highlighted the balance between Member States’ procedural autonomy and the supremacy of EU law.

Issues

  1. Whether national limitation periods can lawfully restrict the ability to bring actions based on EU law rights.
  2. Whether national time limits for enforcing EU rights comply with the principles of equivalence (no less favourable than similar national claims) and effectiveness (not to make enforcement impossible or excessively difficult).
  3. What obligations national courts have when national procedural rules risk undermining EU law rights.

Decision

  • The ECJ held that Member States retain the right to set national procedural rules, including limitation periods.
  • However, such time limits must not render the exercise of rights conferred by EU law practically impossible or excessively difficult.
  • The Court emphasized that national procedural rules must comply with both the principles of equivalence and effectiveness.
  • National courts are required to scrutinize whether national time limits unduly impede the effective enforcement of EU law rights.
  • Where a time limit unjustly restricts access to redress for breaches of EU law, courts may be required to disapply the national rule.

Legal Principles

  • The principle of effective judicial protection obliges national courts to safeguard the full and effective enforcement of EU rights.
  • The principle of equivalence requires that conditions for actions based on EU law must not be less favourable than for similar national actions.
  • The principle of effectiveness prohibits national rules from making the enforcement of EU law rights impossible or excessively difficult.
  • National procedural autonomy is limited where it conflicts with the supremacy and uniform application of EU law.

Conclusion

The ECJ’s judgment in Levez confirms that national limitation periods must not undermine EU law rights; national courts must ensure both equivalence and effectiveness when applying procedural rules, thereby guaranteeing individuals the effective judicial protection of EU law across Member States.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal