The legal order of the European Union (EU) has such an important feature as the so-called acquis which constitutes its basis. A special importance of the acquis concept consists in guaranteeing homogeneity of the EU legal system, since it is based on the idea that its elements may not be changed in the process of cooperation with other entities of international law. In general, it ensures integrity of this system and necessarily a uniform application of EU law in all of the Member States. Homogeneity of European Union law is maintained, in particular, in the light of the interpretation given by the EU Court of Justice in several of its judgments. The Court sees EU law as a new legal order for the sake of which the States have restricted their sovereign powers and which is distinct both from international law and national law. The lacking certainty of this concept in the acts of the European Union, especially in the founding treaties, and unavailability of its official interpretation by the EU Court of Justice results in a divergent understanding of such a complex as the acquis.

The aim of the article is to study the acquis concept within the framework of the EU legal order.

The acquis is a very dynamic doctrine which is constantly evolving towards expansion and deepening of regulatory structures. The content of the acquis can be split into the “constitutional” portion incorporating the main principles of the legal order structure, and the “precedent” one – the fundamental legal positions of the EU Court of Justice forming the inviolable core of the acquis which may not be changed without prejudice to the supranational nature of the EU. The “constitutional” acquis includes principles of EU law application in national legal orders: supremacy, direct effect and direct application; general principles of EU law: proportionality, non-discrimination, subsidiarity, legal certainty, legitimate expectations, respect for human rights.

Bibliography

Authored books

1. Karen D, Understanding European Union Law (Cavendish Publishing Limited 2001) (in English).

2. Loo G, The EU-Ukraine Association Agreement and Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area: A New Legal Instrument for EU Integration without Membership (Brill Nijhoff 2016) (in English).

3. Petrov R, Transposition of the European Union acquis into the legal systems of the third countries (Istina 2012) 364 (in English).

 4. Pieters K, The Integration of the Mediterranean Neighbours into the EU Internal Market (T.M.C. Asser Press 2010) (in English).

5. Rapoport C, Les partenariats entre l’Union européenne et les Etats tiers européens. Etude de la contribution de l’Union européenne à la structure juridique de l’espace européen (Bruylant, Bruxelles 2011) (in French).

6. Toth A, Oxford Encyclopedia of European Community Law (Oxford 1990) (in English).

7. Muraviov V, Vstup do prava Evropeiskogo Soyuzu [Intruduction to the EU Law] (Kyivskyi universytet 2007) (in Ukrainian).

Edited books

8. Kronenberger V (ed), The European Union & the International Legal order: discord & harmony (T.M.C. Asser Press 2001) (in English).

9. Lazowski A, ‘With but Without you… The Europeanisation of Legal Orders of the Neighbouring Countries’ in Ott A and Vos E (eds), Fifty years of European Integration: Foundations and Perspectives (T.M.C. Asser Press 2009) (in English).

10. Maresceau M, ‘Les accords d’intеgration dans les relations de proximitе de l’Union Europeйnne’, in Blumann C (ed), Les frontiers de l’Union Europeenne (Bruxelles, Bruylant 2013) (in French).

11. Ott A and Inglis K (eds), Handbook on European Enlargement. Commentary on the Enlargement Process (Hague 2002) (in English).

12. Muraviov V (ed), Evropeiske parvo. Pravo Evropeiskogo Soyuzu [European Law. EU Law] (In Yure 2015) (in Ukrainian).

Journal articles

13. Gialdino C, ‘Some Reflection on the Acquis Communautaires’ [1995] 32(3) Common Market Law Review 1089-121 (in English).

14. Lazowski A, ‘Enhanced Multilateralism and Enhanced Bilateralism: Integration without Membership in the European Union’ (2008) 45 Common Market Law Review (in English).

15. Magen A, ‘Transformative Engagement Through Law: The Acquis Communautaire as an Instrument of EU External Influence’ [2007] 9(3) European Journal of Law Reform (in English).

16. Muraviov V, ‘The Acquis Communautaire as a Basis for the Communutity Legal Order’ [2007] 4(2) Miskolc Journal of International Law (in English).

17. Gnatovskii M, ‘Acquis сommunautaire ta stvorennya zagalnoevropeiskogo pravovogo prostoru’ [‘Acquis Сommunautaire and Creation of All-European Legal Area’] (2001) 1 Ukrainskyi chasopys mizhnarodnoho prava (in Ukrainian).

18. Muraviov V, Spilnui dorobok (acquis communautaire) yak osnova pravoporyadku Evpropeiskogo Soyuzu’ [‘Acquis Communautaire as a Basis of the EU Legal Order’] (2004) 8 Ukrainskyi pravovyi chasopys (in Ukrainian).

19. Mushak N, ‘Schengenske acquis ta Ukraina’ [‘Schengen Acquis and Ukraine’] (2014) 22 Viche (in Ukrainian).

20. Petrov R, ‘Ponyttya “acquis сommunautaire” u pravi Evropeiskogo Soyuzu’ [‘The Notion of “Acquis Communautaire” in the EU Law’] (2003) 9 Pravo Ukrainy (in Ukrainian).

21. Smyrnova K, ‘Spivvidnoshennya аcquis communautaire ta dzerel prava Evpropeiskogo Soyuzu’ [‘Interrelation of Acquis Communautaire and Sources of the EU Law’] (2011) 1 Porivnialno-pravovi doslidzhennia (in Ukrainian).

Websites

22. Szyszczak E, ‘The EU Regulatory Magnet: What Are the Consequences for the UK?’ <https://blogs.sussex.ac.uk/uktpo/2017/09/01/the-eu-regulatory-magnet> (accessed: 05.05.2019) (in English).