Free Movement of Goods

Question 1

Which case defines ‘goods’?

Answer 1

Commission v Italy (Italian Art)

Question 2

What is the definition of ‘goods’?

Answer 2

Products that ‘can be valued in money and which are capable, as such, of forming the subject of commercial transactions’

Question 3

Which two principles govern the customs union?

Answer 3

1. Free trade within the EU

2. Common customs tariff to those outside EU

Question 4

Which Article sets out the two principles of the customs union?

Answer 4

Article 28(1) TFEU

Question 5

Which Article sets out the four core freedoms for the internal market?

Answer 5

Article 26(2) TFEU

Question 6

What does Article 30 TFEU prohibit?

Answer 6

Customs duties and CEEs

Question 7

What does Article 110 TFEU prohibit?

Answer 7

Discriminatory taxation

Question 8

Articles 34 and 35 TFEU prohibit what?

Answer 8

Quantitative restrictions (QRs) such as bans or quotas and measures having equivalent effect to quantitative restrictions (MEQRs)

Question 9

Which case gave direct effect to Article 30 TFEU?

Answer 9

Van Gend En Loos

Question 10

What was found to be illegal in the case of Italian Art?

Answer 10

A tax on exports of Italian Art

Question 11

What distinguishes a customs duty from a CEE?

Answer 11

A customs duty is a charge related specifically to importing or exporting specific goods, whereas a CEE is a charge enacted on goods but has some other purpose than to directly tax the import/export of that good.

Question 12

Which two cases provide examples of a CEE?

Answer 12

1. Commission v Italy (Statistical Levy) - where a charge was imposed on imports and exports for the compiling of data;
2. Chougol Diamond Co - where a charge was imposed on diamond imports into Belgium for the specific purpose of raising funds for social security benefits for Belgian diamond workers

Question 13

Does the Court regard the technical differences between a customs duty and CEE as important?

Answer 13

No, the CJ are concerned with the effect of the charge.

Question 14

How did the CJ define a CEE in the case of Statistical Levy?

Answer 14

Any pecuniary charge, however small and whatever its designation and mode of application, which is imposed unilaterally on domestic or foreign goods by reason of the fact that they cross a frontier … even if it is not imposed for the benefit of the State, is not discriminatory or protective’

Question 15

Which case tells us that there are three situations in which a charge on the border will not constitute a customs duty or CEE? What are the three exceptions?

Answer 15

Commission v Germany (Veterinary Inspections): (1) if the charge relates to ‘a general system of internal dues applied systematically and in accordance with the same criteria to domestic and imported products’, (2) payment for a service, which is proportionate, (3) inspections imposed by EU law

Question 16

Despite the checks on imported cowhides in Bresciani were conducted in the interest of public health, why did they not meet the exceptions in Commission v Germany (Veterinary Inspections)?

Answer 16

Because they applied only to imports and similar checks were not made on domestic products.

Question 17

In Commission v Belgium (Customs Warehouses) there was a charge for storing imported goods. Why was this not an acceptable charge? In what circumstances did the CJ say a charge would be appropriate?

Answer 17

It was not of benefit to the importer but was part of customs formalities. A charge would be appropriate if there was consideration, benefit to the importer, and the charge was proportionate.

Question 18

In Commission v Germany (Veterinary Inspections) the CJ gave four criteria for an inspection not to be seen as a CEE. What are they?

Answer 18

1. The charge must not exceed the actual cost of the inspection;
2. The inspection must be obligatory and uniform;
3. The inspection must be imposed by EU law;
4. The inspection must promote free movement of goods by neutralising unilateral inspections

Question 19

Which case holds a similar judgment to Commission v Germany (Veterinary Inspections) in relation to international agreements?

Answer 19

Commission v Netherlands

Question 20

Article 110 disallows any direct or indirect discriminatory taxes. Which case gave Article 110 direct effect?

Answer 20

Lutticke

Question 21

What is the definition of a tax in Commission v France (Repographic Machinery)?

Answer 21

A general system of internal dues applied systematically …

Question 22

What is the test for finding similar products? Which case does the test come from?

Answer 22

At the stage of production or marketing did the products have similar characteristics and meet the same need for the consumer (Rewe-Zentrale)

Question 23

Which case tells us that goods don’t need to be identical but similar to satisfy Article 110(1)?

Answer 23

Commission v France (Spirits)

Question 24

Which case tells us that the characteristics of products will be judged objectively and from the view of the consumer?

Answer 24

John Walker

Question 25

What two products, taxed differently, were not found to be similar in the case of John Walker? How did the Court decide they were different?

Answer 25

Whisky and wine. The court looked at the production process, alcohol content, and how they were consumed.

Question 26

What characteristics did the Court look at in determining similarity in cars in the case of Tarantik?

Answer 26

Price, size, comfort, performance, fuel consumption, durability, reliability and others

Question 27

Which case provides a good example of a directly discriminatory tax contrary to Article 110(1)?

Answer 27

Commission v Italy (Regenerated Oil)

Question 28

What was found to be indirectly discriminatory in the case of Humblot?

Answer 28

Road tax on car engines over 16CV

Question 29

Which case tells us that indirectly discriminatory taxes may be allowed if objectively justifiable and pursuant of EU policy objectives?

Answer 29

Chemial Farmaceutici

Question 30

What tax was sanctioned in Chemial Farmaceutici?

Answer 30

A higher tax on synthetic alcohol over alcohol produced by fermentation

Question 31

In both Commission v UK and Commission v Belgium wine was taxed at a higher rate than beer. Why were the UK the only ones liable for the different taxes being applied?

Answer 31

In Commission v Belgium, the difference in taxes made no material difference to the price.

Question 32

Describe the difference in remedy between a violation of Art 110(1) and Art 110(2).

Answer 32

A violation of Art 110(1) will require the tax rate to be the same for both products. A violation of Art 110(2) will require measures to bring the tax rates closer together.

Question 33

What case tells us that the Member State may be liable against Art 34 for not imposing against its citizens the need for free movement of goods?

Answer 33

Commission v France (Spanish Strawberries)

Question 34

Which case defines quantitative restrictions as ‘measures which amount to total or partial restraint … of imports, exports, or goods in transit’?

Answer 34

Geddo

Question 35

Which case gives us a good example of quota?

Answer 35

International Fruit Company (No 2)

Question 36

How do distinctly and indistinctly applicable measures differ?

Answer 36

The former apply different measures to domestic and foreign goods. The latter, on the face, appear to apply similar measures to domestic and foreign goods, but effectively hamper foreign goods.

Question 37

Which case defines MEQRs?

Answer 37

Dassonville

Question 38

What did Dassonville concern?

Answer 38

Certificate of origin required for whisky. This effected importers of Scotch whisky who weren’t from Scotland.

Question 39

How did Dassonville define MEQRs?

Answer 39

‘All trading rules enacted by Member States which are capable of hindering, directly or indirectly, actually or potentially, inter-state trade.’

Question 40

What was the MEQR found in Firma Denkavit?

Answer 40

Costly inspections that caused delays

Question 41

What was the MEQR in Commission v Ireland (Dundalk Water Supply)?

Answer 41

The Irish Govt had gone out to tender for the provision of water and demanded a standard that only an Irish supplier could meet.

Question 42

In R v Thompson the UK were able to use Art 36 derogation on what basis? Why?

Answer 42

Public policy. The case concerned a defendant smelting coins and the UK argued the ban was in place to protect the right to the mint.

Question 43

The CJ rejected the use of the public policy derogation in Cullet. Why?

Answer 43

In Cullet the French argued that they were maintaining the price of petrol at such a high price in case retailers couldn’t deal with the chaos of unfettered competition!

Question 44

To avoid Article 34 a selling arrangement must do what according to Keck?

Answer 44

1. Apply to all affected traders within MS;

2. Affect the marketing of domestic and imported products equally in law and in fact.

Question 45

What was the MEQR in Rewe-Zentrale (‘Cassis de Dijon’)?

Answer 45

25% min alcohol content to sell in Germany

Question 46

What two tests come from the case of Cassis de Dijon?

Answer 46

1. Presumption of mutual recognition

2. Rule of reason/mandatory requirements