Flaminio Costa v ENEL (1964) Case 6/64 was a landmark decision of the European Court of Justice which established the primacy of European Union law (then Community law) over the laws of its member states. Facts Mr. Costa was an Italian citizen who had owned shares in an electricity company, Edisonvolta, and opposed the nationalisation of the electricity sector in Italy. He asked two lower courts in Milan (two different Giudici conciliatori) to ascertain that the real creditor of his electricity bill (a relatively small amount of money, 1,925 lire) was the nationalised company, Edisonvolta, and not the newly established state company, Enel. He argued that the nationalisation of the electricity industry violated the Treaty of Rome and the Italian Constitution. The first Giudice conciliatore of Milan referred the case to the Italian Constitutional Court and the second Giudice conciliatore referred it to the European Court of Justice. The Italian Constitution Court gave judgement in March 1964, ruling that while the Italian Constitution allowed for the limitation of sovereignty under an international organisation like the European Economic Community, it did not upset that normal rule of statutory interpretation that, where two statutes conflict, the subsequent one prevails (lex posterior derogat legi anteriori/priori). As a result, the Treaty of Rome which was incorporated into Italian law in 1958 could not prevail over the electricity nationalisation law which was enacted in 1962. In light of the decision of the constitutional court, the Italian government submitted to the ECJ that the Italian court's request for a preliminary ruling from the ECJ was inadmissible on the grounds that, as the Italian court was not empowered to set aside the national law in question, a preliminary ruling would not serve any valid purpose. Judgment The ECJ held that the Treaty of Rome rule on an undistorted market was one on which the Commission alone could challenge the Italian government. As an individual, Costa had no standing to challenge the decision, because that Treaty provision had no direct effect. However, Costa could raise a point of EC law against a national government, in legal proceeding before the courts in that member state, since EC law would not be effective, if Costa could not challenge national law on the basis of its alleged incompatibility with EC law. Significance This groundbreaking case established the principle of supremacy in EU law, which is an independent source of law that