Parallel Imports

Author(s):  
Alexander Mühlendahl ◽  
Dimitris Botis ◽  
Spyros Maniatis ◽  
Imogen Wiseman

Free movement of goods, one of the ‘four freedoms’ together with free movement of persons, services, and capital covered in the Treaties, is a fundamental principle with two purposes. The first is purely economic; a customs union and common market comprising individual Member States cannot be established unless goods from all the Member States are sold freely and compete effectively in all the Member States. The second is political, if there is to be a single common market then goods must flow freely within its borders. The effect of national measures that block the importation of goods from one Member State to another, make their marketing more difficult, or raise their price, is the distortion of the free flow of goods and competition. Inevitably, in a single market such measures have to be eliminated.

2012 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 345-368
Author(s):  
Marek Szydło

Driving licences, understood as an official authorisation issued by a State permitting a person to drive power-driven vehicles, belongs to those kinds of legal documents that can potentially significantly facilitate and enhance the free movement of persons (EU citizens) between Member States. Provided that a driving licence is duly recognized by Member States other than the State issuing the licence, the holder of the licence can move to those other Member States using his/her individual means of transport, and is entitled to use power-driven vehicles there while pursuing a large number of occupations as an employed or self-employed person. Thus, a driving licence duly recognized by the host Member State enables its holder to move, work, or conduct an economic activity there more effectively and gives the holder some additional options in that regard. Moreover, the driving licence recognized by the host Member State may be used by its holder while there to prove his/her identity and nationality as a Union citizen, and, consequently, it may serve as an equivalent of a passport or identity card. This is important insofar as the requirement to hold those latter documents (or their equivalents) is a formal prerequisite under the relevant EU legislation for Union citizens exercising their rights to enter and to reside in other Member States. The practical importance of driving licences and of the legislation concerning those issues in the EU, especially in the context of free movement of persons, is additionally reinforced by the fact that a valid driving licence is held by an estimated 60% of the Union's population, which means 300 million citizens. The EU and national legislation on driving licences has an undisputed direct impact on their lives.


2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 561-578
Author(s):  
Aniekan Iboro Ukpe

Central to the attainment of West Africa's regional integration objectives is the free movement of Community citizens across national boundaries. This was an implicit acknowledgement by the founding fathers of ECOWAS of the fact that when people move from one member state to another, they carry along with them, not just their skills or requisite know-how, but also physical articles of trade. In other words, free movement of persons within the region would necessarily precipitate a like movement of goods and services across the region, thereby enhancing opportunities for market integration and efficiency. Accordingly, efforts were made through legal instrumentation to create an enabling environment which would facilitate the free movement of persons within the region. Notwithstanding, the multilayered system of laws in the region has operated to undermine the application and enforceability of such regional legal instruments at member-state level. Regional integration in West Africa continues to suffer several setbacks largely as a result of member states’ failure to comply with their treaty obligations. This article takes the view that defining a proper relationship between ECOWAS law and the national law of member states is central to the attainment of the region's aspirations of socio-economic and political integration. This would require a system that obliges member states to effectively cede part of their sovereignty to a regional body on such common issues like trade and thus recognise related regional laws as taking precedence over domestic laws as far as such issues are concerned.


2017 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. 165-186
Author(s):  
Christian NK FRANKLIN

AbstractWhilst the European Union’s aim of achieving an ‘ever closer Union’ is not an objective of EEA cooperation, homogeneity demands that we follow the same path: as the Union gets ever closer, so too does EEA cooperation, in light of the demands of the fundamental principle of homogeneity. This is particularly well demonstrated by looking at developments in the field of the free movement of persons. The case law of the Court of Justice of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA Court) in this field shows that in situations where homogeneity is put to the test, there seems little to suggest that a more national sovereignty-friendly approach has been adopted than under EU law. Notwithstanding the integral differences between the EU and EEA legal constructs, the EFTA Court has proven highly adept at keeping pace with EU developments in the field through a number of bold and creative interpretations of EEA law, and by using different tools to arrive at uniform conclusions.


While the Treaty does not affect the existence of intellectual property rights, there are nonetheless circumstances in which the exercise of such rights may be restricted by the prohibitions laid down in the treaty. 2. Article 36 permits exceptions to the free movement of goods only to the extent to which such exceptions are necessary for the purpose of safeguarding the rights that constitute the specific subject-matter of the type of intellectual property in question. Perhaps the main advantage of this formula, apart from the fact that it narrows the scope of the exceptions permitted by Article 36, is that it allows subtle distinctions to be made depending on the type of intellectual property in issue. 3. The exclusive right conferred on the owner of intellectual property is exhausted in relation to the products in question when he puts them into circulation anywhere within the Common Market. Spelt out more fully, ‘the proprietor of an industrial or commercial property right protected by the legislation of a Member State may not rely on that legislation in order to oppose the importation of a product which has lawfully been marketed in another Member State by, or with the consent of, the proprietor of the right himself or person legally or economically dependent on him’. The expression ‘industrial and commercial property’ clearly embraces patents and trademarks. It also extends to such specialised areas as plant breeders’ rights. The court has held that copyright can also be a form of industrial or commercial property because it ‘includes the protection conferred by copyright, especially when exploited commercially in the form of licences capable of affecting distribution in the various Member States of goods incorporating the protected literary or artistic work’. The principle that the Treaty does not affect the existence of industrial and commercial property rights is derived from Article 222 of the treaty. This provides that ‘the treaty shall in no way prejudice the rules in Member States governing the system of property ownership’. Consequently intellectual property rights are unaffected by the provisions of the treaty unless they hinder free movement or offend the rules of competition. In Keurkoop v Nancy Kean (see below) the design of a handbag which was manufactured in Taiwan was registered in the Benelux countries but without the authority of the actual author. In Case 78/70, Deutsche Grammophon v Metro-SB Grossmärkte [1971] ECR 487, [1971] CMLR 631, the European Court stated:


Author(s):  
Igor Merheim-Eyre

Igor Merheim-Eyre examines an area where EU values and interests appear to be currently in real tension – migration. Once again, while the EU institutions themselves may wish to promote values, individual member states are protecting their interests. He examines the ways in which the development of the single market and internal free movement has led to the need for greater control of the EU’s external borders. In this context the neighbours are seen as having a responsibility to help protect the EU from migration from further afield. In acquiescing in this they are promised visa-free access. We see the application of conditionality by the EU, referred to in several chapters, used not to just to promote norms and values but to defend the EU’s security interests. The EU may wish Turkey to be EU-ised but more immediately it needs Turkey to stop migration into the EU from Syria.


Author(s):  
Elspeth Guild ◽  
Steve Peers ◽  
Jonathan Tomkin

This chapter examines the right of exit and entry provided for in the citizens’ Directive. Articles 4 and 5 of Directive 2004/38 affirm the right of Union citizens and members of their family to leave their Member State of origin and to enter any other Member State of their choosing. As such, these Articles constitute a ‘gateway’ for the exercise of rights of residence and rights of permanent residence provided for in the Directive. In addition to affirming the right of free movement, Articles 4 and 5 specify the administrative documentation and procedures governing travel between Member States. However, there have been significant failures to transpose these provisions correctly, with some Member States imposing exit controls on their own citizens, while some Member States blatantly ignore the clear legal requirements of the Directive.


Author(s):  
Angelo Marletta

The European Union (EU), as unprecedented institutional and polity project, is responsible for the fulfilment of a set of policy goals that go beyond the mere sum of the interests of its Member States. The establishment of an ‘area of freedom, security and justice without internal frontiers, in which the free movement of persons is ensured in conjunction with appropriate measures with respect to . . . the prevention and combating of crime’ is probably one of the most demanding goals of the integration process, whose fulfilment requires commitment to coherent action on several levels: vertically, between the EU and the Member States, through incorporating the implementation of the Treaty objectives in the development of their respective criminal policies, and horizontally, between the Member States themselves, by developing mutual trust.


Author(s):  
Robert Schütze

This chapter highlights the complex constitutional arrangements governing the free movement of persons. The EU Treaties distinguished between two classes of economic migrants, namely, employed and self-employed persons; and today's Treaty title dealing with persons still addresses ‘Workers’ and the ‘Right of Establishment’ in two separate chapters. With the 1992 Maastricht Treaty, the two special chapters on persons were complemented by the general rules on EU citizenship. Unsurprisingly, there has been a complex relationship between the two specific sources of free movement rights and the EU citizenship provisions. Their symbiotic relationship is particularly embodied in the ‘Citizenship Directive’. The chapter then considers the possible justifications for Member State restrictions on the free movement of persons.


2020 ◽  
pp. 121-153
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Homewood

This chapter discusses the law on the free movement of persons in the EU. Free movement of persons is one of the four ‘freedoms’ of the internal market. Original EC Treaty provisions granted free movement rights to the economically active—workers, persons exercising the right of establishment, and persons providing services in another Member State. The Treaty also set out the general principle of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality, ‘within the scope of application of the Treaty’. All these provisions are now contained in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Early secondary legislation granted rights to family members, students, retired persons, and persons of independent means. The Citizenship Directive 2004/38 consolidated this legislation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document