ws4 Flashcards
Commission v Italy (Art Treasures) [1968]
Goods defined as that which is ‘valued in money’ and ‘capable of forming the basis of commercial transactions’
Luigi Geddo [1973]
Defined QRs as ‘measures which amount to a total or partial restraint or, according to circumstances, imports, exports of goods in transit’. Essentially:
- Outright bans imposed on imports of another Member State
- A quote system.
Dassonville [1974]
- Whisky sellers in Belgium required to get a certificate of origin
- Found that this was prejudiced against traders importing whisky from France - harder to get certificate
- ‘All trading rules enacted by Member States which are capable of hindering, directly or indirectly, actually or potentially, intra-Community [now intra-EU] trade’.
Commission v Ireland (“Buy Irish” Campaign) [1982]
Deemed there was sufficient State involvement in the ‘Irish Goods Council’ - which was set up to promote Irish trade.
Example of how Article 34 TFEU does not require actual hindrance to trade, but only the potential to effect trade and also that it was a non-binding measure, but still caught by the prohibition.
UHT Milk [1983]
- Requirement of a license to import, even if a mere formality, was held to be an MEQR as it could cause delay.
- Requirement to repack non-UK UHT milk in a UK dairy an MEQR as it led to extra expense and delay which in practice, amounted to a total prohibition on imports.
Origin Marking [1985]
A requirement for certain retail goods to be marked with country of origin was deemed an MEQR as the ECJ believed it would encourage UK consumers to by according to national origin, and they are more likely to buy UK products than any others.
Commission v France (Angry Farmers) [1997]
The failure of the French Government to take action against the violent campaign of protestors against imported goods was deemed an MEQR as it allowed the campaign to continue, serious impacting imports to France.
Unsuccessful in defence of Public Policy
Irish Souvenirs [1981]
As there was no rule requiring indication of country of origin or the word ‘foreign’ for souvenirs produced in Ireland, it was a rule targeted at non-Irish products and compliance would result in extra expense for producers/importers.
Commission v UK (“Newcastle Disease”) [1982]
the UK Government prohibited the import of French poultry into the UK, ostensibly to avoid the spread of Newcastle Disease. The evidence put forward
indicated that the prohibition was unnecessarily restrictive (immunisation
would have had the desired effect) and was, in reality, intended to protect
the UK poultry industry
Article 36 TFEU: ‘Such measures shall not constitute a means of arbitrary discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade.’
Schmidberger [2003]
Free movement of goods is a fundamental freedom and must be ensured by Member States.
But, when there are other interests for Member States to protect - in this case, freedom of expression - provided the Member State does so in a way which is least restrictive of the free movement of goods, Article 34 TFEU will not be breached.
Campus Oil Ltd [1984]
Irish law that required importers of petrol to buy a certain percentage
of their requirements from a State-owned refinery was challenged.
ECJ stated that petroleum products of such exceptional importance as an energy in the modern economy, that the law in question, which sought to guarantee the uninterrupted supply of such products, was justified - transcended purely economic considerations.
Cassis de Dijon [1979]
ECJ stated that Member States may be able to justify measures that were necessary to satisfy the mandatory requirements of the State. These mandatory requirements are:
- The effectiveness of fiscal supervision;
- The protection of public health;
- The fairness of commercial transactions;
- The defence of the consumer
AND principle of Mutual Recognition:
The idea that products lawfully produced and sold in one Member State should generally be able to move freely throughout the Community - can be rebutted by Article 36 TFEU/Cassis.
Cinetheque [1986]
Added a general interest reason - the protection of culture - to the Cassis list.
Protection of French cinema.
Walter Rau (Margerine) [1982]
- Belgian law which required all margarine to be packed in cubes so consumers could easily tell the difference with butter
- Belgium justified under consumer protection
- Was found to be disproportionate - could just clearly label packaging
Keck [1993]
Ruled in response to increasingly high number of uses of Article 34 TFEU to challenge any law which limited commercial freedom, regardless of whether or not it impacted imports - Sunday trading cases.
Distinguishes between Cassis by stating that ‘selling arrangements’ are not normally MEQRs within the definition in Dassonville, therefore, wont wall within Article 34 TFEU.
Decides that the Article will not apply to national laws on purely selling arrangements as long as:
- The laws apply to all traders operating in the national territory; and
- The laws affect the marketing of domestic products and imports from other Member States in the same way.
