150 likes | 326 Views
Internal policies. Stages of economic growth Free trade zones Customs union Common market Economic union. Free movement of goods Art 23, 25: No customs duties + No charges having equivalent effect (CEE) Comm v Italy re art tax (7/68)
E N D
Internal policies Stages of economic growth Free trade zones Customs union Common market Economic union
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 a fee designated as a tax, under art 25 (charges having equivalent effect) and Art 90 (direct or indirect internal 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