scholarly journals Can a Parallel Importer Rebrand Pharmaceutical Products in the EU?

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-76
Author(s):  
Jurgita Grigienė ◽  
Paulius Čerka ◽  
Dalia Perkumienė
Keyword(s):  
National Court ◽  
Trade Mark ◽  
Pharmaceutical Products ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Objective Necessity

AbstractThe European Union has established the free movement of goods, which covers the parallel import of goods in the EU. However, the free movement of goods should not infringe on the rights of trade mark owners. In some cases, parallel importer needs not only to repackage but also to rebrand pharmaceutical products. ECJ has stated that rebranding is permissible if objective necessity to rebrand exists. But it is the national court that has to determine what objective necessity is. This paper analyses the decisions of EU Member States. In some cases, objective necessity has been determined on similar grounds. However, in other cases, a necessity to enter some part of the market has been evaluated differently in different Member States. The different evaluation of the necessity criterion could be treated as the infringement of uniform application of the free movement of goods in the EU.

scholarly journals Review of the Construction Labour Demand and Shortages in the EU

Buildings ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
Belinda Brucker Juricic ◽  
Mario Galic ◽  
Sasa Marenjak
Keyword(s):  
Free Movement ◽  
Construction Sector ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Total Employment ◽  
Member States ◽  
Skill Levels ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Free Movement Of Workers ◽  
European Union Member States ◽  
The Eu

This paper reviews the recent literature on skill and labour shortages in the labour market with special emphasis on the construction sector in the European Union Member States, foreseeing the Construction 4.0 era. The free movement of people is one of the rights of all citizens of the EU which also includes the free movement of workers. Labour shortages in the EU are expected to increase in the future due to a declining population and an ageing workforce. In order to recognize and forecast labour shortages, EU Member states use a variety of instruments but they do not answer as to whether it is possible to use migrant labour to appease those shortages. There are several systems used to classify labour shortages in the EU Member states. Most of the countries classify labour shortages in relation to different sectors or occupation groups as well as by skill levels, but in some Member States, classification is made according to the type of employment. Instruments used to measure labour shortages significantly differ from country to country. Several criteria are used for creating lists of shortage occupations and most of the criteria include demand side and supply side criteria. A majority of the Member States are facing labour and skill shortages in various sectors and the construction sector is not an exception. As total employment in the construction sector decreased, so did the share of employed migrants. Labour shortages in the construction sector can be eased by the availability of a labour supply willing to accept unqualified and low-paying jobs. The construction sector seeks low-, medium-, and high-skilled individuals and is most likely the sector where most of the incoming migrants will be working, which has an impact on the development and implementation dynamic of Construction 4.0.

Calls of Duty: Romanian Politicians’ Deontological Discursive Strategies for Securing Free Movement in the European Union

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 43-66
Author(s):  
Saila Heinikoski
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Prime Ministers ◽  
Discursive Strategies ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Different Types ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

This article discusses how the right to free movement within the European Union is presented as a matter of obligation, a duty of the other EU member states, in the discourse of Romanian Presidents and Prime Ministers (2005–2015). An examination of speeches and other statements from these politicians illuminates Romanian political reactions during the period when Romania became an EU member state, and reflects perceptions of Europeanness and European agreements. These issues take on an additional contemporary significance in the context of the Brexit negotiations, and they also add to the broader debate on whether EU norms and obligations are seen as being both just and equally applied. By analysing different types of argumentative topoi, I examine the deontological (obligation-based) argumentation employed in the free movement context. Furthermore, I examine to what extent these arguments are invoked in support of the right to free movement and who this right applies to. I argue that for Romanian politicians, deontological free movement arguments are connected to other states’ compliance with European treaties and to demands for equal application of European rules without discrimination, or the delegation of responsibility to others. This manifested itself most frequently in the calls for the EU and its member states to do their duty by treating Romanians equally to other EU citizens.

scholarly journals Does the European Single Market Exist in the Era of a Coronavirus Pandemic? The Case of Intra and Extra-EU Trade in COVID-19-related Products

2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-83
Author(s):  
Adam A. Ambroziak ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Trade ◽  
Single Market ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Eu Legislation ◽  
European Single Market ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods ◽  
The Times ◽  
The Eu

The COVID-19 pandemic has been an extraordinary event for the EU Member States and a period wherein EU legislation and the efficiency of EU institutions have been put to the test. The crisis triggered by the decisions made by governments in Europe (which were motivated by their wishes to protect the health and lives of their peoples and to satisfy the rapid demand for drugs, personal protective equipment, and medical devices) disrupted market forces. Although most of these measures were based on both domestic and EU legislation, they seriously hindered the smooth functioning of the EU Single Market, including the free movement of goods. This paper aims to find out whether EU legislation succeeded in coping with the challenges triggered by COVID-19 in the field of international trade and whether measures taken by the European Commission with a view to complying with the rules of the EU Single Market adequately took care of the needs stemming from the COVID-19 outbreak and whether it properly tackled protectionist instruments adopted by the Member States. We have focused on international trade and the free movement of goods within the EU as they both constitute the cornerstone of EU economic integration. We found that although EU legislation was not tailored specifically for the times of a COVID-19 pandemic, in the area of international trade (including intra-EU trade), as well as in the field of placing goods on the market, it provided extraordinary solutions. Apparently, the explanations and guidelines provided by the Commission have limited the scope of individual protectionist and interventionist actions of the Member States.

scholarly journals Montenegro’s accession to the European Union: Possible consequences of the free movement of persons for the Montenegrin social security system

SEER ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-58
Author(s):  
Frederic De Wispelaere ◽  
Gabriella Berki ◽  
Snjezana Balokovic
Keyword(s):  
Social Security ◽  
Social Security System ◽  
Security System ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
System P ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons ◽  
The Eu

This article discusses the potential impact of the free movement of persons in the EU on the Montenegrin social security system. It can be argued that three variables will be of great importance: 1) mobility between Montenegro and other EU member states; 2) social security legislation in Montenegro; and 3) the social security Coordination Regulations. The scale of migration will be highly dependent on whether there are transitional arrangements and whether neighbouring countries, not least Serbia, join the EU at the same time. In order to avoid an erosion of the workforce and consequently of people paying taxes in Montenegro, it might be useful to negotiate transitional arrangements as well as to promote oth er types of labour mobility, such as intra-EU posting. Furthermore, it can be expected that Montenegro’s accession will have financial and administrative implications in the area of healthcare. After all, accession to the EU will lead to a further increase in the number of tourists and thus of the amount that Montenegro will have to recover from member states if unplanned healthcare has been provided in Montenegro.

scholarly journals Inkorporacja acquis Schengen do prawa Unii Europejskiej i prawa krajowego państw członkowskich

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 69-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Artur Gruszczak
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
Internal Security ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Political Analysis ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons ◽  
The Eu

This article takes up in the form of an interdisciplinary legal and political analysis the issue of the incorporation of the Schengen acquis into European Union law and the national legal systems of the EU member states in the light of the concept of a hybrid system of territorial governance. Accordingly, the Schengen acquis stimulated the process of intersecting the interests of internal security and the protection of Member States’ borders with the supranational ideological imperative with regard to the principle of free movement of persons. The argument developed in this article is that the incorporation of the Schengen acquis into EU law consolidated hybridity of the legal and institutional construction of the EU after the Amsterdam Treaty as a result of the contradiction between the logic of political bargain at the intergovernmental level and the vertical spillover generated at the supranational level in the institutional and decision-making dimensions. The conclusions point to the emergence, as a result of “schengenisation”, of the area of freedom, security and justice in the EU, in which the principle of free movement of people brought about diversification of the states’ adaptation mechanisms in relation to the ideologically determined project of transformation of the system of management of the territory and borders within the European Union.

5. Free movement of goods

2020 ◽  
pp. 90-120
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Homewood
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Equivalent Effect ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Eu

This chapter discusses the law on the free movement of goods in the EU. Free movement of goods is one of the four ‘freedoms’ of the internal market. Obstacles to free movement comprise tariff barriers to trade (customs duties and charges having equivalent effect), non-tariff barriers to trade (quantitative restrictions and measures having equivalent effect), and discriminatory national taxation. The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) prohibits all kinds of restrictions on trade between Member States. Article 30 (ex Article 25 EC) prohibits customs duties and charges having equivalent effect; Article 34 (ex Article 28 EC) prohibits quantitative restrictions and all measures having equivalent effect; and Article 110 (ex Article 90 EC) prohibits discriminatory national taxation.

5. Free movement of goods

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Homewood
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Equivalent Effect ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Eu

This chapter discusses the law on the free movement of goods in the EU. Free movement of goods is one of the four ‘freedoms’ of the internal market. Obstacles to free movement comprise tariff barriers to trade (customs duties and charges having equivalent effect), non-tariff barriers to trade (quantitative restrictions and measures having equivalent effect), and discriminatory national taxation. The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) prohibits all kinds of restrictions on trade between Member States. Article 30 (ex Article 25 EC) prohibits customs duties and charges having equivalent effect; Article 34 (ex Article 28 EC) prohibits quantitative restrictions and all measures having equivalent effect; and Article 110 (ex Article 90 EC) prohibits discriminatory national taxation.

scholarly journals THE IMPACT OF COVID-19 ON THE FREE MOVEMENT OF PERSONS IN THE EU

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dunja Duić ◽  
Veronika Sudar
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Political Legitimacy ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Freedom Of Movement ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Eu

The impact of the COVID-19 outbreak is being endured throughout the world, and the European Union (EU) is no exception. The rapid spreading of the virus effected, among other things, restriction on the freedom of movement. The EU member states introduced national response measures to contain the pandemic and protect public health. While broadly similar, the measures differ with regard to strictness and the manner of introduction, reflecting the political legitimacy of the respective country. With the ‘Guidelines concerning the exercise of the free movement of workers during COVID-19 outbreak’ – its first COVID-19-related Communication – the European Commission (EC) attempted to curb differing practices of the EU member states and ensure a coordinated approach. Ultimately, this action was aimed at upholding of fundamental rights as guaranteed to EU citizens, one such being the freedom of movement. Thus, from the very start of the pandemic, the coordinated actions of EU institutions sought to contain the spread of COVID-19 infections with the support and cooperation of EU member states. This is confirmed by the most recent Council of the EU (Council) recommendation on a coordinated approach to restrictions to freedom of movement within the EU of October 2020. While they did prevent the spread of infection and save countless lives, the movement restriction measures and the resulting uncertainty have greatly affected the people, the society, and the economy, thereby demonstrating that they cannot remain in force for an extended period. This paper examines the measures introduced by EU member states and analyses the legal basis for introducing therewith limitations on human rights and market freedoms. To what extent are the EU and member states authorized to introduce restrictions on the freedom of movement in the interest of public health? Have the EU and member states breached their obligations regarding market freedoms and fundamental rights under the Treaty? And most importantly: have they endangered the fundamental rights of the citizens of the EU?

scholarly journals The Schengen Crisis and the End of the “Myth” of Europe Without Borders

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 30-39
Author(s):  
Birte Wassenberg
Keyword(s):  
European Integration ◽  
Contemporary History ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Separation Function ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods ◽  
Border Controls ◽  
Positive Functions ◽  
The Eu

The European Schengen crisis, spurred off by a wave of terrorist attacks in Europe and an unexpected increase in migration across the Mediterranean Sea in 2015 led to a re-questioning of the functions of borders in European integration. The ideal of a “Europe without borders” has been particularly affected. Indeed, the re-introduction of border controls in several Member States of the European Union (EU) symbolized a new obstacle to free circulation in Europe and the “separation” function of the border seems to have strengthened. This contribution will argue that the Schengen crisis has not put an end to “Europe without borders” in terms of free movement of goods, services, capital and people. It will claim instead that there has been a construction of a “myth” of “Europe without borders” with a different meaning, i.e. in which “Europe without borders” is not a means to an objective but an objective in itself, that of an EU where all borders are assumed to have negative functions and should therefore disappear. The Schengen crisis helps to unravel this “myth” by demonstrating that borders can also have positive functions, that they persist within the EU and that their control remains a competence of the EU Member States. Adopting a less mystified view of “Europe without borders” and assessing its origin and development from a disciplinary approach in Contemporary History, helps to better explain the processes of de- and re-bordering in Europe and their relationship to European integration.

Political aspects of security of the European Union Member States

2020 ◽  
pp. 97-105
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Kusztykiewicz-Fedurek
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Political Security ◽  
New Institutions ◽  
The Stability ◽  
Key Aspects ◽  
The Eu

Political security is very often considered through the prism of individual states. In the scholar literature in-depth analyses of this kind of security are rarely encountered in the context of international entities that these countries integrate. The purpose of this article is to draw attention to key aspects of political security in the European Union (EU) Member States. The EU as a supranational organisation, gathering Member States first, ensures the stability of the EU as a whole, and secondly, it ensures that Member States respect common values and principles. Additionally, the EU institutions focus on ensuring the proper functioning of the Eurozone (also called officially “euro area” in EU regulations). Actions that may have a negative impact on the level of the EU’s political security include the boycott of establishing new institutions conducive to the peaceful coexistence and development of states. These threats seem to have a significant impact on the situation in the EU in the face of the proposed (and not accepted by Member States not belonging to the Eurogroup) Eurozone reforms concerning, inter alia, appointment of the Minister of Economy and Finance and the creation of a new institution - the European Monetary Fund.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document