The Free Movement of Goods

Art 34 TFEU

Quantitative restrictions on imports and all measures having equivalent effect (MEQRs) shall be prohibited between MSs

1 of 31

Riseria Luigi (1973)

QRs=any measure which amounts to a total or partial restraint on imports, exports or goods in transit

2 of 31

Dassonville (1974)

MEQRs= all trading rules enacted by MSs which are capable of hindering, directly or indirectly, actually or potentially, intra-Community trade

3 of 31

R v Henn & Darby (1980)

A total ban is a quantitative restriction under art 34 TFEU

4 of 31

International Fruit (No 2) (1971)

Imposed quotas on imports also constitute QRs

5 of 31

Commission v France (Angry Farmers case) (1997)

Art 34 places a positive duty on MSs to adopt measures upholding principle of free movement of goods (here, failure by French authorities to prevent blockade by French farmers of Spanish fruit and veg was unlawful)

6 of 31

KJ Lewis (1983)

Art 34 TFEU does not prevent promotion of specific qualities of particular products, however, such promotion may not discourage the purchase of the imported product

7 of 31

Directive 70/50 (REPEALED)

Distinctly applicable measures=measures which discriminate against imports because they make importation move difficult or costly relative to the domestic product-these do not apply equally to domestic and imported goods

8 of 31

Cassis de Dijon (1979)

Distinctly applicable measures may only be justified under art 36 TFEU

9 of 31

Directive 70/50 (REPEALED)

Indistinctly applicable measures=appear, prima facie, to be equally applicable to domestic and imported goods, but the effect of the measures disadvantages imported goods by requiring them to satisfy the state’s domestic set of rules for similar prod

10 of 31

Keck (1993)

Product requirements involving the designation, form, size, weight, composition, presentation, labelling and packaging of the product concerned will be regarded as indistinctly applicable MEQRs

11 of 31

Keck (1993)

Art 34 will not apply if the measure is regarded as a ‘selling arrangement’ relating to when, where or how the goods are sold-the national measures must apply to all relevant traders operating within the national territory and the effect must be the

12 of 31

Tankstation (1994) and Hunermund (1993)

Dutch rules providing for compulsory closure of petrol stations and German rules prohibiting advertising outside pharmacies were held to be selling arrangements as they applied without distinction to the origin of the products and did not affect the

13 of 31

Firma Denkavit (1979)

Imposing additional requirements on imported goods is a distinctly applicable measure

14 of 31

Commission v Ireland (Buy Irish Campaign) (1982)

National rules giving preference to domestic goods

15 of 31

Cassis de Dijon (1979)

Principle of mutual recognition: there is no valid reason why goods lawfully produced and marketed in one MS should not be intro’d into any other MS

16 of 31

Cassis de Dijon (1979)

Rule of reason: obstacles to movement are only acceptable if nec to satisfy mandatory req’ts relating to particular effectiveness of fiscal supervision, protection of public health and fairness of commercial transactions

17 of 31

Tankstation (1994)

National rules providing for compulsory closure of petrol stations were not in breach of art 34 as they were selling arrangements which applied equally to all traders without distinguishing

18 of 31

Mars (1995)

National law in Germany prohibiting selling of Mars Bars marked 110% as part of Europe-wide selling campaign was held to relate to the presentation, labelling and marketing of a product lawfully manufactured in another MS-the prohibition imposed a du

19 of 31

Familiapresse (1997)

A prohibition on inclusion of games with prizes in newspapers was held to be more than a mere selling arrangement as it required a change to the product itself

20 of 31

KO v GIP (2001)

If national provisions restricting or prohibiting certain selling arrangements are to avoid breaching art 34, they must not be of such a kind as to prevent access to the market by products from another MS or to impede access any more than they impede

21 of 31

Leclerc-Siplec (1995), A-G Jacobs

Keck has received judicial and academic criticisms: selling arrangements e.g. advertising are crucial in breaking down barriers to inter-state trade and thus should not be excluded from art 34 TFEU in all circumstances

22 of 31

Art 36 TFEU

MSs can legitimately limit the freedom of movement of goods and thus derogate from principles comprised in arts 34 and 35 TFEU on grounds of ‘public morality, public policy an public security’ or the protection of health and life of humans or the pro

23 of 31

R v Henn & Darby (1979)

A MS may prohibit on this ground any obscene materials as understood by its domestic laws-a measure must be nec, but must not involve arbitrary discrimination or a disguised restriction on inter-member trade

24 of 31

Conegate (1985)

Seizure of dolls being imported from Germany to UK on grounds that they were indecent and obscene was a breach of art 34 TFEU, being discriminatory on grounds of national as there was a lawful domestic trade of inflatable goods

25 of 31

R v Thompson (1978)

UK govt prosecuted T and others for importing gold coins in order to melt the, down-public polcy at issue was the preservation of the national coinage and right to mint coinage-to protect the right to mint coinage which is traditionally regarded as i

26 of 31

Campus Oil (1983)

Irish order requiring petroleum oils to buy certain percentage of petroleum products from Irish National Petroleum Company at prices fixed by minister was a matter of public security as maintaining a refinery enabled Ireland to enter into long-term c

27 of 31

Officer van Justitie (1981)

A MS may protect the public by banning additives where there is genuine scientific doubt about their safety

28 of 31

Commission v UK (1982)

The risk to health must be real and form a part of a seriously considered health policy

29 of 31

NFU (1996)

Where there is uncertainty as to the existence or extent of risks to human health, the institutions may take protective measures without having to wait until the illegality or seriousness of those risks becomes fully apparent

30 of 31

Davidoff (2001)

Consent constitutes the decisive factor in the extinction of the proprietor’s exclusive right to prevent 3rd parties from importing goods bearing his trademark – consent must be unequivocal

31 of 31

Get Revising

The Free Movement of Goods

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Back

Card 3

Front

Back

Card 4

Front

Back

Card 5

Front

Back

Comments

Similar Law resources:

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Back

Card 3

Front

Back

Card 4

Front

Back

Card 5

Front

Back

Comments

Related discussions on The Student Room

Similar Law resources: