Between market access and discrimination: free movement as a right to fair conditions of competition

2017 ◽  
pp. 13-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gareth Davies
Keyword(s):  
Market Access ◽  
Free Movement

11. Free movement of services: the freedom to provide and receive services

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margot Horspool ◽  
Matthew Humphreys ◽  
Michael Wells-Greco
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
European Union ◽  
Direct Effect ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Market Access ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Health Care Provision ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Law ◽  
To Receive

This chapter reviews the law on the free movement of services in the European Union. It discusses the service economy and the law on services; non-discrimination and the direct effect of Article 56 of the TFEU; the meaning of services; remuneration; economic services and other activities; services and cross-border activity; the freedom to provide a service; the freedom to receive services; health care provision and the receipt of services; services that move, where the provider and recipient do not; limitations on services freedom; public interest grounds limiting the freedom of Article 56 TFEU; proportionality and limitations on services; illegal services; and the focus on market access and the facilitation of services in the Services Directive.

Goods, Persons, Services and Capital in the European Union: Jurisprudential Routes to Free Movement

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 159-209 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Connor
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Market Access ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Equivalent Effect ◽  
National Rule ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods ◽  
National Measure

This Paper considers the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice in relation to the free movement provisions of European Community law in relation to goods, persons, services and capital within the European Union. It examines the bases used by the Court in its application of Community free movement provisions to national measures that may seek to hinder the exercise of such rights. From limited enquiry originally founded on considerations of non discrimination based on nationality, to one most recently focussed on the ‘restriction’ to the free movement right, the Paper examines the methods employed by the Court of Justice in its scrutiny of the national measure appearing to conflict with Treaty free movement rights.The examination of the applicable free movement jurisprudence attempts to demonstrate the want of a thematically consistent underpinning within free movement case law. The Paper draws attention to the complexities and even the confusions that appear to be inherent within free movement jurisprudence and arguably evidenced within the Court's journey from ‘discrimination’ to ‘restriction’ as the basis of the enquiry with regard to the application of Treaty free movement rights. In its consideration of Case C-110/05Commission v Italy, Case C-142/05Åklagaren v. Percy Mickelsson v. Joakim Roos, recent jurisprudence with respect to the free movement of goods, the Paper notes that in the context of the ‘measure having equivalent effect’, the emphasis in the assessment of the national rule has shifted to an examination of the effect on market access, rather than a distinction based on the type of rule.

13. Free Movement of Goods I

2021 ◽  
pp. 499-556
Author(s):  
Robert Schütze
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Market Access ◽  
Internal Market ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Fundamental Freedom ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods ◽  
Constitutional Regime ◽  
The Eu

This chapter analyses the constitutional regime of ‘negative integration’ in the context of the free movement of goods. The free movement of goods has traditionally been the most progressive fundamental freedom within the internal market. The negative integration regime for goods is split over two sites within Part III of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). And with regard to goods, the EU Treaties further distinguish between fiscal restrictions and regulatory restrictions. The fiscal restrictions include pecuniary charges that are imposed on imports or exports (customs duties and discriminatory taxation), while the regulatory restrictions include non-tariff measures that limit market access by ‘regulatory’ means. The chapter then looks at possible justifications for such regulatory restrictions.

Untying the Market Access Knot: Advertising Restrictions and the Free Movement of Goods and Services

2007 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 177-215
Author(s):  
Dimitrios Doukas
Keyword(s):  
Market Access ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Professional Activity ◽  
Goods And Services ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods ◽  
Broad Interpretation ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Marketing Methods ◽  
Advertising Restrictions

More than a dozen years since the Keck judgment, its effect of breaking the dogmatic convergence between the free movement of goods and that of services, already established in the case law of the ECJ by the early 1990s, cannot be underestimated. As is well known, this convergence primarily relied on such a broad interpretation of the scope of Articles 28 and 49 EC as to include any obstacles to intra-Community trade arising from measures applying beyond discrimination unless justified. The basic divergence introduced by Keck into the Court’s approach to the free movement provisions on goods and services can best be illustrated by the case law reviewing measures relating to advertising and other marketing methods. This paper will draw on a broad definition of advertising, which will include any commercial communication, ie any form of communication designed to promote, directly or indirectly, the goods, services or image of a company, organisation or person exercising a commercial, industrial or other professional activity.

6. The Free Movement of Persons: Key Principles

2019 ◽  
pp. 199-232
Author(s):  
Catherine Barnard
Keyword(s):  
Direct Effect ◽  
Market Access ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Treaty Provision ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons ◽  
Movement Rules

This chapter provides an overview of the principles which apply to the free movement of all persons. In order to benefit from the free movement rules, the claimant must fall within the personal, material, and territorial scope of the Treaty provision and, in addition, must be able to rely on the Treaty provision against the particular defendant (the principle of direct effect). The chapter then discusses the scope of the Treaty prohibition. It shows that, at least in principle, refusal of entry/deportation, discriminatory measures, and non-discriminatory measures which impede market access are all prohibited by the various provisions of the Treaty.

Migration controls will complicate Swiss-EU relations

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Market Access ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Foreseeable Future ◽  
Job Seekers ◽  
Popular Vote ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Horizon 2020 ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Swiss Government

Subject Switzerland's popular vote on migration controls. Significance The already-difficult relationship between Switzerland and the EU has been complicated by the popular vote on migration controls for EU citizens in February 2014. Its implementation will violate the EU's principle of free movement of people, which the EU has refused to renegotiate. Nonetheless, the Swiss government has to find a solution before a three-year deadline expires in February 2017, which will turn the latent conflict with the EU into an acute one. Impacts Firms will face higher bureaucratic obstacles to employing job seekers not already residing in Switzerland. A broadening of the mutual market access between Switzerland and the EU is highly unlikely in the foreseeable future. The prospects for Swiss participation in EU programmes such as Horizon 2020 and Creative Europe remain uncertain.

“Market Access” or Bust? Positioning the Principle within the Jurisprudence of Goods, Persons, Services, and Capital

2012 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 679-755
Author(s):  
Tim Connor
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Market Access ◽  
National Level ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Equivalent Effect ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons

The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provides with respect to the free movement of goods that “[q]uantitative restrictions on imports and all measures having equivalent effect shall be prohibited.” In contrast, the TFEU provides that, with respect to the free movement of persons, services, and capital, restrictions at the national level on such rights are similarly unlawful.

11. Free movement of services: the freedom to provide and receive services

2021 ◽  
pp. 363-391
Author(s):  
Margot Horspool ◽  
Matthew Humphreys ◽  
Michael Wells-Greco
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
European Union ◽  
Direct Effect ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Market Access ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Health Care Provision ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Law ◽  
To Receive

This chapter examines the law on the free movement of services in the European Union. It discusses the service economy and the law on services; non-discrimination and the direct effect of Article 56 TFEU; the meaning of services; remuneration; economic services and other activities; services and cross-border activity; the freedom to provide a service; the freedom to receive services; health care provision; services that move where the provider and recipient do not; limitations on services freedom; public interest grounds limiting the freedom of Article 56 TFEU; proportionality; illegal services; the focus on market access and the Services Directive.

scholarly journals Understanding Market Access: Exploring the Economic Rationality of Different Conceptions of Free Movement Law

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 671-703 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gareth Davies
Keyword(s):  
Market Entry ◽  
Market Access ◽  
Competition Law ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Economic Rationality ◽  
Central Thesis

There has been much discussion of the proper scope of the European Treaty articles on free movement. Central to this discussion has been a debate about the best concept around which to build free movement law, and in this debate “discrimination” has been opposed to “market access.” It is, however, the central thesis of this paper that the opposition is largely false. In general, measures which affect all market actors equally do not, as a matter of economic fact, impede market access. The non-discriminatory measures which impede market access, which some have felt it so important to bring within the Treaty, are therefore more mythical than real. This argument is made with reference to competition law and theory concerning barriers to market entry.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document