EU law and UK law

Paul Craig

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter


This chapter compares the respective answers of the English and EU systems of administrative liability within a wider comparative study. It focuses on their common and distinctive traits. It does so, first, with regard to the constitutional provisions concerning government liability and its connections with judicial review of administration. It points out, in particular, the different meaning and significance of fault. Next, the chapter turns to the answers given to the hypothetical cases on which the ‘common core’ method is based. As a preliminary remark, it sheds light on the particularities of the EU administration. It then looks at basic principles. It shows that, in relation to procedural fairness, the similarity outweighs the difference between the UK and the EU, while, on substantive grounds, the latter has a general principle of liability, unlike the former. A more detailed analysis also shows that the case law of EU courts has provided increased certainty in respect to the breach of procedural constraints on exercises of administrative power. In the UK, a public authority must owe a duty of care to the claimant to be held liable, and the conditions for an action to be successful are more difficult to satisfy than where the same action is pursued between private individuals.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationTort Liability of Public Authorities in European Laws
PublisherOxford University Press
Number of pages9
ISBN (Electronic)9780198867555
StatePublished - Mar 18 2021


  • Actions
  • Common law
  • EU administration
  • General principles for damages liability
  • Jurisdiction
  • Legality and liability
  • Liability of EU member states
  • Remedies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Social Sciences


Dive into the research topics of 'EU law and UK law'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this