Internal policies

Stages of economic growth

• Free trade zones• Customs union• Common market• Economic union

1. Free movement of goods

• Art 23, 25:

No customs duties

+ No charges having equivalent effect (CEE)

• Comm v Italy re art tax (7/68)

Comm v Germany re live animal inspection costs (18/87)

1. Free movement of goods

• Art 90: No direct taxation

• Comm v Italy re regenerated oil (21/79)• Comm v Ireland (55/79)

+ no indirect (discriminatory, once inside a MS) taxation

• Humblot v Dir des Service Fiscaux (112/84)

but objective justification: Chemial Farmaceutici v DAF (140/79)

• advise a state with regions of v heavy rainfall re a tax favoring such goods to support people of such areas

1. Free movement of goods

Difference between afee designated as a tax, under art25 (charges having equivalenteffect) and Art 90 (direct or indirectinternal taxation) ?

– A CEE is any charge imposed on an imported product but not on the same or similar domestic product

– An internal tax is borne by imports and domestic products

– If there are no similar domestic products, the charge need not be a CEE if part of a general system of internal dues

• Art 25 and Art 90 are exclusive

1. Free movement of goods

• Art 28, 29

• No quantitative restrictions on imports and exports

• + No meqrs “…all trading rules enacted by MSs capable of hindering, directly or indirectly, actually or potentially, intra Community trade”.

• What are meqrs? • Dir 70/50 • Procureur du Roi v Dassonville

(8/74)-overtly targets imports

or exports-directly discriminatory-hinders Comm trade

1. Free movement of goods

Defences to Art 28: Art 30

Public morality

Public policy

Public security

Protection of health and life of…

Construed strictly + principle of proportionality

1. free movement of goods

and ECJ:

Rewe v BMV f. Branntwein (Cassis de Dijon, 120/78)-measures apply to all products

-not directly discriminatory

-still hinders trade

Can only be defended if necessary to satisfy mandatory requirements (fiscal supervision, prot public health, fairness of comm transaction, defence of consumer – list is not exhaustive)

1. Free movement of goods

• Cassis de Dijon also stands for– Mutual reciprocity principle

• Court generally checks both defences

– Comm v Germany (German beer, 178/84)

– Comm v Denmark (containters, env prot, 302/86)

– Comm v Belgium (food additives, 2000)

• Is any measure exempt from art 28?

– Torfaen BC v B&Q (145/88)– Keck (268/91)

1. Free movement of goods

• To reduce non-tariff barriers, must harmonise product standards re health, safety, env, consumer protection

• CE mark

2. Free movement of workers

– Art 39-43 (employed)– No direct or indirect discrimination– What is a worker?– Not those in public service– What is public service?

3. Freedom of establishment

– Art 43-48 (self employed)• Art 43 directly effective (Reyners)• Non-discrimination

– provision of services 49-55

General grounds for derogation

from free movement of workers,

freedom of establishment:

39(3) public policy, security, health

46(1) public policy, security, health

Based on personal conduct (van Duyn)

4. Free movement of capital

Aspects of competition law/policy

• Art 81-86 antitrust:– Agreements, decisions, concerted

practices which have as their object distortion of competition = prohibited unless do not have effects

ICI v Commission (48/69)Wood pulp (85/202)

– Statutory exceptions 81(3)

– Exemptions must be granted• Individually• En block• Negative clearance

Aspects of competition law/policy

– abuse of dominant position (United brands v Commission 27/76, Hofmann La Roche 85/76) = prohibited

– Mergers regulated as having impact on competition, to be notified

Continental Can (6/72)

Aspects of competition law

• Art 87-89 government subsidies (state aid)– Social or economic justification– Gratuitous– Intention irrelevant– Must affect Comm. Trade– Exemptions subject to Comm.

Control

• Statutory exceptions– 87(2)– 87(3)

• Cooperate with MS to determine (Art 88)

Spain v Comm. (409/00)

• Product liability– Directive 85/374

• Consumer protection

– Based on consumer protection and information policy

– Comm v Germany (178/84) re German beer

– Oosthoek case (286/81)– Comm v Spain (107/04) re labelling

of organic products