Samenvatting
Samenvatting Probleem 7 uitwerkingen European Law
- Instelling
- Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam (EUR)
Dit zijn de uitwerkingen van European Union Law Probleem 7 Jaar 2
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 2 van de 13 pagina's
Voorbeeld 2 van de 13 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
Gekoppeld boek
Titel boek:
Auteur(s):
- Uitgave:
- ISBN:
- Druk:
Verkoper
Volgen
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Probleem 7 European LawLeerdoelen:
(1) What is the free movement of workers (including the justifications & limitations)?
(2) What is the right of establishment/freedom of establishment regarding natural persons (including the justifications & limitations)?
(3) What is the recognition of diplomas and how does that relate to the internal market?
(4) What is the free movement of services (including the justifications & limitations)?
E-lesson Free movement of workers: art 45 TFEU
The free movement of workers is codified in Article 45 TFEU. Article 45 TFEU is given further substance by the Workers Regulation
(Regulation 492/2011) and the CRD (Directive 2004/38, the Citizenship Rights Directive, CRD). Article 45 TFEU and the Workers
Regulation give workers the right to move freely across the EU to seek and take up employment in another Member State on the same
terms as nationals. The Workers Regulation sets out specific rights for workers and their families, outlaws restrictions on the access of a
worker to the labor market of the host State, and confirms that the principle of equal treatment shall apply in an employment
relationship.
Article 45 TFEU prohibits direct discrimination, indirect discrimination, and non-discriminatory restrictions.
Justifications to the free movement of workers
The possibilities for justifying violations of the free movement of workers depend on the type of measure (direct discrimination, indirect
discrimination, or non-discriminatory restriction). Direct discrimination based on the nationality of the worker can only be justified on
the basis of explicit Treaty rules (= explicit justifications). For the other types of violations, a Member State can invoke either justification
grounds explicitly mentioned in the Treaty or one of the imperative requirements (so-called implied justification). Once a measure
violating the free movement of workers can validly rely on an explicit or implied justification ground, all measures need to furthermore
satisfy the proportionality test.
Directly discriminatory measures are measures that apply to persons because of their nationality. For instance, legislation stating that
foreign workers should be paid less than native workers is on its face (obviously) directly discriminatory. The same goes for a rule that
specifies that a football team shall consist only of national players.
Indirectly discriminatory measures may be applicable when there is neutral legislation at first glance, however, the effects of the
legislation are to the detriment of workers stemming from the other Member States. A second situation may be applicable when the
national laws that are indistinctly applicable can more easily be satisfied by national workers than by migrant workers or where there is a
risk that they may operate to the particular detriment of migrant workers. maar de effecten van de wetgeving zijn nadelig voor
werknemers uit andere lidstaten.
Non-discriminatory measures are measures that apply regardless of nationality and are liable to hinder or make less attractive the
exercise of the fundamental freedom in question, for instance by obstructing access to the market of a host Member State to an
economically active EU citizen.
Indirect discriminations and non-discriminatory restrictions which constitute an obstacle to the national of a Member State who wishes
to exercise his freedom of movement as a worker can potentially be justified by implied justification grounds (also known as imperative
requirements, overriding requirements relating to the public interest etc. recognized in case law or on the basis of the explicit
justification grounds recognized by Article 45(3) TFEU and secondary law (public policy, public security, public health).
The CJEU has recognized in the Gebhard case (C-55/94), the possibility for a Member State to justify non-discriminatory and indirectly
discriminatory measures on the basis of implied justifications, namely imperative requirements, as long as they satisfy the
proportionality-test. (for all EU citizens) (Bosman ziet alleen op justification for workers)
In order for a Member State to rely on these imperative requirements, the contested national measures must (Gebhard case, para. 37)
fulfill four conditions. The measure must cumulatively:
(1) be justified by imperative requirements in the general interest or, if available, an explicit justification ground recognized by Article
45(3) TFEU;
(2) be suitable for securing the attainment of the objective which they pursue (the invoked imperative requirement or explicit
justification ground); geschikt zijn om de verwezenlijking van het nagestreefde doel te verzekeren
(3) not go beyond what is necessary to attain the objective that they pursue (there is no less restrictive measures possible) and
(4) be proportionate in the strict sense.
In conclusion, the key point is that direct discrimination based on nationality can only be justified on the basis of the Treaty. For
everything else that is a barrier to the free movements, a Member State can invoke either a justification based on the Treaty (explicit
justifications) or one of the imperative requirements (implied justifications). Once a justification ground (either an explicit or an implied
one) is successfully identified, a measure needs to satisfy the proportionality test, meaning that they have to be suitable, there should be
no less restrictive measures possible and the measure should be proportionate in the strict sense.
The public service exception
For workers, there is a public service exception for restrictions on the free movement of persons. This can be found in Article 45(4) TFEU.
This provision states that the provision containing the prohibition of discrimination of workers, Article 45 TFEU, shall not apply to
employment in the public service, meaning the free movement of workers in the public service may be restricted. In other words, Article
45(4) TFEU allows a Member State to impose restrictions on the access of EU migrant workers to employment in the public service of
that Member State: Member states may reserve ‘state jobs’ for their own nationals. Article 45 TFEU and the prohibition to the free
, movement of workers is hence not applicable to employment in the public service. This is an exception, not a justification; this difference
matters as the proportionality test applies to justifications, whereas it does not apply to exceptions.
Webcast on workers
Art 45 has direct effect. Workers Regulation: art 7 (equal treatment), and the CRD. These rules are harmonisation.
Both provisions prohibit:
− Direct and indirect discrimination and other forms of discrimination (non-
discriminatory; See Graf (C-190/98: ‘too indirect and uncertain’)).
Definition and Scope workers
− 66/85 Lawrie-Blum: Someone that for a certain period of time performs services
for and under the direction of another person in return for which they receive
remuneration.
- Effective and genuine economic activity and not purely marginal and ancilliary (C-357/89, Raulin);
- Article 7(3) CRD: retaining status of a worker after termination work;
What about jobseekers?
- (C-292/89, Antonissen); six months and even more providing there is evidence of continuation of
employment search and genuine chances of being engaged;
- Article 14(4)(b) CRD;
- Equal treatment of jobseekers ‘as regards access to employment’ (Case 316/85, Lebon);
EXCEPTOINS
1. Art 3 Worker Regulation: linguistic requirements ‘by reason of the nature of the post to be filled’
2. Art 45 (4) TFEU: employment in the public service/public authority: Commission v. Belgium:
E-lesson Free movement of persons Part III: The Freedom of Establishment of Self-employed Natural Persons
The freedom of establishment is divided in two parts;
- One part consists of the self-employed natural persons falling under Article 49
TFEU. Self-employed persons are persons working for themselves in a host
Member State;
- The other part of establishment consists of companies and legal persons who
are covered by Article 54 TFEU.
Self-employed natural persons
Article 49 TFEU states that the freedom of establishment shall include the right to take
up and pursue activities as self-employed persons and to set up and manage
undertakings, in particular companies or firms. Article 49 TFEU prohibits directly
discriminatory and indirectly discriminatory measures (on grounds of nationality), as well
as non-discriminatory restrictions.
Article 53 TFEU provides a special competence to the EU for the adoption of directives
on the mutual recognition of formal qualifications and the coordination of provisions
concerning the taking up of professional activities. The Union has adopted a range of
sectoral directives on different professions (architects, doctors, lawyers etc.). This resulted in a vertical approach to recognition (for
separate professions). Gradually, a more horizontal approach was appreciated, resulting in the adoption of Directive 2005/36 on the
recognition of professional qualifications (Professional Qualification Directive). Artikel 53 VWEU verleent de EU een bijzondere
bevoegdheid voor het aannemen van richtlijnen betreffende de wederzijdse erkenning van opleidingskwalificaties en de coördinatie van
bepalingen betreffende de toegang tot beroepswerkzaamheden. De Unie heeft een reeks sectorale richtlijnen aangenomen voor
verschillende beroepen (architecten, artsen, advocaten enz.).
Justifications to the freedom of establishment
We will explain what the justifications to the freedom of establishment are. This is a rather unclear area of law as the possibilities of
justifications depend on the type of measure (direct/indirect or non-discriminatory restriction). The key point is that direct
discrimination on the basis of nationality can only be justified on the basis of the Treaty (= express justifications). For everything else,
a Member State can invoke either a justification based on the Treaty or one of the imperative requirements (both express and implied
justifications). All the justifications brought forward need to satisfy the proportionality test.
The rights provided by the freedom of establishment in EU law are subject to certain limitations. Article 52 TFEU sets out what we call
express justifications which can be used on grounds of public policy, public security, or public health (…) (Article 52(1) TFEU).
1. Directly discriminatory measures (the equivalent of ‘distinctly applicable measures’ in the free movement of goods) can be justified
only based on the express Treaty justifications in Article 52 TFEU.
As we will see below with the discussion of the implied (case law) justifications, those cannot be used for directly discriminatory
measures of States.
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper chlvdziel. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €3,29. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 49768 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen