100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
Previously searched by you
Previously searched by you
logo
Summary European Union Law - The Principle Underpinning Free Movement of Goods £9.66   Add to cart
Quickly navigate to
Preview
  2.  
  3. Oxford University (OX)
  4.  
  5. EU Law

Summary

Summary European Union Law - The Principle Underpinning Free Movement of Goods
 3 views  0 purchase

Comprehensive break down of the different viewpoints on the principle underpinning free movement of goods in EU law through all the key cases (Dassonville, Cassis de Dijon, Keck, Commission v Italy, Mickelsson and Roos). This document also includes lengthy analysis that can be used to structure an ...

[Show more]

Preview 1 out of 4  pages

Document information

  • October 7, 2024
  • 4
  • 2022/2023
  • Summary

Subjects

Written for

All documents for this subject (10)

Seller

avatar-seller
bethjscott5713

Content preview

What is the principle underpinning Free Movement of Goods?
“The question then is what test should be applied in order to determine whether a measure falls
within the scope of Article 34 TFEU. There is one guiding principle which seems to provide an
appropriate test: that principle is that all undertakings which engage in a legitimate economic
activity in a Member State should have unfettered access to the whole of the EU market, unless there
is a valid reason for denying them full access to a part of that market. In spite of occasional
inconsistencies in the reasoning of certain judgements, that seems to be the underlying principle
which has inspired the Court’s approach from Dassonville through Cassis de Dijon to Keck. Virtually
all of the cases are, in their result, consistent with the principle, even though some of them appear to
be based on different reasoning.”
Advocate General Jacobs in Société d’Importation Edouard Leclerc-Siplec v TFI Publicité SA
and M6 Publicité SA (1995).

1. Introduction:
Article 34 TFEU states that quantitative restrictions on imports and all measures
having equivalent effect shall be prohibited between MS.
AG Jacobs – purports to demonstrate that the principle underpinning Article
34 is market access, in other words, whether they hinder access to a given
market within the Union.
Essay will analyse the complex case law in this area, namely the progression from
Dassonville to Cassis de Dijon to Keck and beyond.
Despite the apparent turn taken by the CJEU in Keck, subsequent cases such
as Commission v Italy and Mickelsson and Roos are arguably indicative of the
law re-centering around the notion of market access.
BUT – as this essay will argue, the Court’s judgement in Keck cannot be
characterised as a mere occasional inconsistency but in fact establishes an entirely
new approach to be applied under Article 34, relying on the concept of whether the
measure has a discriminatory effect or not.
As such, the approach to be applied is not based purely on the concept of
market access, but rather the question of whether the measure has a
discriminatory effect is not only rooted in the Treaty but also equally evident
in the case law.
By failing to recognise this, disguising their approach as “market access”, the
Court in fact conceals what is truly going on.
The result is a lack of coherence in the case law.
The Court should recognise that divorcing free movement from inequality makes
little sense (Davies) and given its inherent risk of overuse, should cease deferring
blanketly to the notion of market access.
2. No such thing as EU Market:
Preliminary fundamental point = as Enchelmaier aptly puts, there is no such thing as
an EU market on its own.
There are instead 27 national markets governed by national law, the friction
between them reduced by a layer of Union law through, inter alia, the free
movement of goods framework.
What’s more, the concept of “market access” has not adequately been defined in the
case law, with much academic discussion centering around its content.
Taking account of Article 26 TFEU, which conceives of the MS as markets,
this essay will proceed on the basis that “market access” is simply free
movement between MS.
3. Dassonville and Cassis de Dijon:
The concept of measures having equivalent effect to quantitative restrictions
(MEQRs) under Article 34 was first defined in C-8/74 Dassonville as all measure

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller bethjscott5713. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for £9.66. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

72042 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 14 years now

Start selling

Recently viewed by you

Case ·

(0)

Dalisay Edwards – OBGYN. Case Study.
£9.66
  • (0)
  Add to cart