Policy Making and Application of Law: Free Movement of Persons and the European Court of Justice

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aksel Hatland ◽  
Even Nilssen
Keyword(s):  
Policy Making ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Application Of Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons

Free Movement of Services versus National Labour Law and Industrial Relations Systems: Understanding the Laval Case from a Swedish and Nordic Perspective

2008 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 493-523 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mia Rönnmar
Keyword(s):  
European Integration ◽  
Industrial Relations ◽  
Eu Enlargement ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Labour Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons ◽  
The Eu

European integration, the internal market and free movement of persons and services are important aspects of EC labour law and EU industrial relations. As a result of EU enlargement and the emphasis on free movement within the EU, the problems of posting of workers, low-wage competition and social dumping are high on the agenda. This is illustrated by the epochal and much-debated Laval and Viking cases from the European Court of Justice (ECJ).

The Area of “Freedom, Security and Justice” and the European Court of Justice—a Personal View

2000 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nial Fennelly
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Title I ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Personal View ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons ◽  
Border Controls ◽  
Treaty Of Amsterdam

The Treaty of Amsterdam enshrines in Article 2 (formerly Article B) of the Treaty on European Union under the new Title I called “Common Provisions” (which contains, with some amendments, the provisions of the former Articles A to F) a new objective for the Union, namely:“to maintain and develop the Union as an area of freedom, security and justice in which the free movement of persons is assured in conjunction with appropriate measures with respect to external border controls, asylum, immigration and the prevention and combating of crime.”

The Margin of Appreciation

2020 ◽  
pp. 67-96
Author(s):  
Jan Zglinski
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Analysis ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Domestic Institutions ◽  
Factors Influencing ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Number Of Factors ◽  
Margin Of Appreciation

This chapter examines the application of the margin of appreciation in free movement cases. It identifies the doctrine’s legal scope and investigates the scenarios in which the European Court of Justice defers to national authorities. A statistical analysis suggests that there is a significant gap between theory and practice, with only a small number of factors influencing the way in which the margin of appreciation is used. The results show how much regulatory autonomy Member States retain in free movement law. They also expose which concerns the Court prioritizes in its jurisprudence and which decisions it feels safe, or forced, to delegate to domestic institutions.

Harmony and Dissonance in Free Movement

2001 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 315-341
Author(s):  
Miguel Poiares Maduro
Keyword(s):  
Free Movement ◽  
Middle Ground ◽  
National Treatment ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods ◽  
Free Movement Of Persons ◽  
Movement Rules ◽  
Reversal Of Fortune

There is a generalised perception that the European Court of Justice has adopted different approaches to the different free movement rules included in the Treaties. In particular, the free movement of goods has ‘benefited’, until 1993, from a wider scope of application. Contrary to what has for long constituted the standard approach to the free movement of persons, the free movement of goods was constructed as requiring more than national treatment and non-discrimination in regard to goods from other Member States. Even non-discriminatory restrictions on trade in goods could constitute a violation of Community rules if not justified as necessary and proportional to the pursuit of a legitimate public interest. The freedom to provide services has somewhat occupied a middle ground between the interpretation given to the goods and persons provisions. Following the Court’s decision in Keck & Mithouard in 1993, a reversal of fortune appears to have taken place regarding the Court’s approach to the different free movement provisions, with the free movement of persons and the freedom to provide services now benefiting from a more ‘aggressive’ interpretation in comparison with the free movement of goods.

11. Free movement of goods II: non-tariff barriers

2020 ◽  
pp. 287-318
Author(s):  
Nigel Foster
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Free Movement Of Goods

This chapter examines European Union (EU) law concerning non-tariff barriers to free movement of goods. It describes member states’ attempts to influence imports and the way the European Commission and the European Court of Justice (CoJ) handled these issues. This chapter explains the provisions of the relevant legislation for non-tariff barriers, which include Articles 34, 36, and 35 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). It also analyses example cases including ‘Dassonville’, ‘Cassis de Dijon’, and post ‘Keck’ case law. It concludes with a consideration of the latest trend of cases concerning product use and residual rules.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document