qpr-1-2013-foreword.pdf | Page 100

100 Monika Kirilova Kirova if it fails to implement a directive.7 It has been further extended in Brasserie du Pecheur SA v Germany [1996], where it was held that incorrect implementation of a directive will suffice for a breach of European Union law. Moreover, Toner (1997: 169) emphasises that once State liability for wrongful damage is accepted, it is difficult to justify the immunity of the judiciary; especially when taking into account the consequences a wrongful judgment might have on an individual. In addition, liability for judicial errors is the next reasonable step in ensuring the effectiveness of European Union law. As Nassimpian (2007: 830) proposes, liability for judicial errors acts as an incentive for the judiciary to give efficient protection of individual rights. Arnull (2010: 61) considers that such liability addresses the fundamental role of the Member States’ judiciary in the application of European Union law. Furthermore, by taking into account the practical application of the decision, it could be argued that the t