A critical evaluation of the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) that has interpreted the provisions of the Acquired Rights Directive. Is the case law emerging from the CJEU deficient, and why?

The essay critiques the evolving jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) concerning key concepts of a specific Directive. It argues that the CJEU's inconsistent decisions over time have created ambiguity, resulting in insufficient legal certainty for national courts. This lack of clarity undermines the effectiveness of the law, highlighting the challenges faced by legal practitioners in interpreting the Directive. The analysis is rooted in European Labour Law and reflects a high academic standard, receiving an A grade from the University of Edinburgh.