Free movement of goods Flashcards
Commission v UK (UHT Milk)
Example of MEQR
Dassonville
MEQRs are rules capable of hindering directly or indirectly, actually or potentially, intra-Community trade
Commission v France (Angry Farmers)
MEQR example
Commission v Ireland (Souvenirs case)
MEQR example
Commission v UK (re origin marking of retail goods)
MEQR example. No need that the measure effectively hindered intra-Community trade. It is only relevant that it had the potential to do so
Schmidberger v Austria
The free movement of goods is a fundamental freedom under EU law and must be ensured by MS. However, there may be other interests a MS is required to protect (here freedom of expression). Provided that the MS does so in a way which is the least restrictive of the free movement of goods, the State will not be in beach of art 34 TFEU
Cassis de Dijon
Indistinctly applicable MEQRs must be accepted in so far as they are necessary in order to satisfy mandatory requirements relating in particular to effectiveness of fiscal supervision, protection of public health, fairness of commercial transactions and consumer protection. Mandatory requirement means a reason for having the restriction in place.
Principle of mutual recognition: each MS should recognise the legality of each other’s product
Commission v Germany (Beer purity laws)
Indistinctly applicable restriction of free movement of goods was held not to be necessary
Keck
Pure selling arrangements are not MEQRs if (1) the laws apply to all traders operating in the national territory (2) the laws affect the marketing of domestic and imported products in the same way
Punto Casa v Capena
sunday trading laws are mere selling arrangement
Gourmet international
Swedish laws banning advertising of alcohol products held to be MEQRs
Clinique Laboratories + Mars GmbH
laws requiring repackaging will never be mere selling arrangements
