Free Movement of Goods

Question 1

Van Gend en Loos

Answer 1

Dutch government reclassified goods and charged a higher import duty to the importer, held it was a direct contravention of Article 30.

Question 2

Re: Export Tax on Art Treasures

Answer 2

Italian state attached customs duties to art being sold to collectors outside of Italy, tried to justify the charge but it was held that purpose was irrelevant for Article 30.

Question 3

Commission v Italy

Answer 3

Charges equivalent to customs duties - any charge imposed unilaterally on domestic and foreign goods by reason of the fact that they cross a frontier.

Question 4

Geddo

Answer 4

Quantitative restrictions - measures which amount to a total or partial restraint of imports, exports or goods in transit.

Question 5

Dassonville

Answer 5

Rule required certificates of origin for some products, affected importers and favoured Belgian products. Held - all trading rules which are capable of hindering, directly or indirectly, actually or potentially, intra-Community trade are to be considered as measures having an effect equivalent to quantitative restrictions.

Question 6

Commission v Ireland

Answer 6

Government funded “buy Irish” campaign, breached Article 34 as it was designed to substitute domestic products and was liable to affect volume of trade between states

Question 7

Commission v France

Answer 7

Article 34 must be understood as intending to eliminate all trade barriers, whether direct or indirect, actual or potential, to flows of imports in intra-community trade.

Question 8

Cassis de Dijon

Answer 8

Prohibition on liquors below 25% abv, reasoned with protection of public health. Held: regulations applying to imported and domestic goods (indistinctly applicable measures) that produce an effect equivalent to a quantitative import restriction is unlawful. Rule of reason for necessary measures.

Question 9

Essent Belgium

Answer 9

Scheme requiring electricity companies to source a proportion of electricity locally was prima facie a breach but justifiable under rule of reason.

Question 10

Keck and Mithouard

Answer 10

Challenge to measure preventing resale at a loss, argument that it could reduce volume of sale and reduce imports. Held - certain selling arrangements are outside the scope of Article 34 so do not need justification. Must affect domestic and foreign products in fact and in law.

Question 11

Sunday Trading cases

Answer 11

Keck judgement prevented use of Article 34 by traders challenging rules.

Question 12

Gourmet International

Answer 12

Case related to alcohol the consumption of which is linked to traditions and social practices, a prohibition on advertising was likely to impede market access for foreign products than domestic goods. Justification - protecting public health.

Question 13

Conegate

Answer 13

Member States cannot rely on grounds of public morality to prohibit the importation of goods from other member states which its legislation contains no prohibition on the manufacture or marketing of the same foods on its territory.

Question 14

Centre Leclerc

Answer 14

To prove public policy justification, must be risk of disorder.

Question 15

Campus Oil

Answer 15

Legislation requiring imports of petroleum should be matched by requiring purchase of Irish petroleum was justified on public policy and security grounds as it was to guarantee the operation of Ireland’s only oil refinery. Public security will differ between member states. Aim transcended purely economic considerations.

Question 16

Commission v UK

Answer 16

UK wanted to make licence compulsory to import UHT milk, was held that less restrictive measures could be taken.

Question 17

Bonsignore

Answer 17

Member States may not use deportations as “examples”, any deportations must be based on a person posing a genuine and sufficiently serious threat to society.