Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gethsemane342)
    Do you mean the 2nd limb of tha Para 16 provisio? If so, essentially, you need to see if it's equal legally and factually. So, for example, a rule which says "Shops can only sell pens between the hours of 8am and 9pm" is the same in law. It's also the same in fact because, regardless of where the pens came from, they'll only be sold between those hours so there's no disparate impact on the foreign provider.

    Now let's take adverts. The law says "Cleaning products may not be advertised on TV". In law, this is equal. In fact, because advertising is a huge way to impact the market, people will only know their home products so foreign providers have a tougher time getting into the market. This means it's not equal in fact, because they can't sell their goods as well as a home provider, and fails the 2nd limb of Keck.
    Thank you very much
    That makes a lot of sense, I did some research and it made a bit more sense to me, but nothing beats a fellow students explaining it to me!
    I can't wait for this EU coursework to be done! Just need to tackle freedom of services and establishment and I'm a happy camper.

    Hope you have a great easter!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Katharos703)
    here you go


    Art. 28 => general principle
    Art. 30 => money, pecuniary charge
    Art. 110 => no discriminating taxation
    Art. 34 => quantative restrictions

    Art. 30 TFEU => only two of the question will need to be answered:
    - SCOPE
    - BREACH
    => All you discuss are these two steps, any breach is a violation, no justifications are possible!!
    o There are only three quasi-exception which are recognized by the court, but this situations actually just don’t fall within the scope of art. 30 TFEU
    => Service rendered
    • Must be done specific for importer (e.g. if there is a boat wish is in a haven, it you unload it, is is normal he will have to pay for it)
    => Inspection required by the Union
    => Internal taxation (not art. 30 applies, but art. 110 TFEU)

    Art. 34 TFEU
    1. QR
    a) Definition in Geddo
    b) Art. 36 TFEU
    i. Zero quota can be justified (Henn and Darby BUT Conegate!)
    2. MEE
    => Definition in Dassonville
    a) Distinctly applicable
    a. Grounds on the origin of the good
    b. Everything that is imposed on non-nationals what isn’t on nationals => different burden in law e.g. commission v. Ireland (Buy Irish)
    c. Derogations only possible on grounds of art. 36 TFEU
    i. Sometimes environment will be accepted to, but not settled case law
    b) Indistinctly applicable ~ all product requirements (e.g. the butter case – Rau)
    => for all technical rules Cassis is created!
    a. Same burden in law, different burden in fact
    b. Defense: Art. 36 derogation + mandatory requirements (cassis de Dijon – principle of mutual recognition)
    c) Commission v. Italy (Trailer) ~ like Gebhard in free movement of persons
    a. You can say this case-law goes back directly to Dassonville
    i. Anything that hinders market access
    ~ Alphine Investments => same burden in law and in fact, but it still hinders access
    => Commission v. Italy is quite the same (nobody will buy the product because you may not use it)
    => It creates a catch all rule a certain safety net.
    3. CSA
    a) Keck and Mithuard
    b) CSA are going about
    i. When
    ii. How
    iii. Where
    iv. By whom are they sold
    c) Para. 16 Keck => not discriminatory (~ about market access, is it hindering) => if it doesn’t fulfill para. 16 (so is discriminatory) it will be threaten as indistinctly applicable)
    Thank You this helps
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Hi, I wondered if anyone could help me answer this problem essay. Thank you.

    Directive 2007/999 (fictitious) requires each Member State to ‘take all necessary measures to ensure that all transport facilities have appropriate amenities for the mobility-impaired’. The Directive required each Member State to ensure its implementation by June 2009.
    a) Germany has implemented Directive 2007/999 in the Public Transport Facilities (Special Needs) Order (‘the Order’) (fictitious), which came into force in December 2008. In relation to underground train stations, the Order provided that lifts must be made available to all wheelchair-bound travellers. In March 2010, Brigitta, who was 8 months pregnant at the time, was refused the use of the lift in an underground station during rush hour since she was not wheelchair-bound. As a result, she had to use the stairs and slipped, breaking her ankle.
    b) In April 2009, Hans injured his back whilst trying to lift his collapsible wheelchair up the steps of a platform for a local tram in Vienna. Austria has still not implemented Directive 2007/999 (fictitious) and there has not been any national law on the subject in Austria.
    c) Caroline attends an independent secondary school in the UK. Caroline’s leg is currently in plaster and she has to use crutches to walk. Her school bus has no ramp and passengers need to climb up three steep stairs to get onto the bus. In May 2011 Caroline suffered a serious head injury after falling down the steps of the bus and hitting her head on the kerb. The UK has not implemented Directive 2007/999 (fictitious). In 2001 the Public Transport Access (Rail) Act (fictitious) was passed. This is the only national law on the subject of public transport access facilities for people with special needs and applies only to trains. The equivalent measures planned to cover road transport were not passed.
    Advise Brigitta, Hans and Caroline as to any legal action they may or may not be entitled to take under European Law

    Any tips would be appreciated. Thanks.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blush Babe)
    Hi, I wondered if anyone could help me answer this problem essay. Thank you.

    Directive 2007/999 (fictitious) requires each Member State to ‘take all necessary measures to ensure that all transport facilities have appropriate amenities for the mobility-impaired’. The Directive required each Member State to ensure its implementation by June 2009.
    a) Germany has implemented Directive 2007/999 in the Public Transport Facilities (Special Needs) Order (‘the Order’) (fictitious), which came into force in December 2008. In relation to underground train stations, the Order provided that lifts must be made available to all wheelchair-bound travellers. In March 2010, Brigitta, who was 8 months pregnant at the time, was refused the use of the lift in an underground station during rush hour since she was not wheelchair-bound. As a result, she had to use the stairs and slipped, breaking her ankle.
    b) In April 2009, Hans injured his back whilst trying to lift his collapsible wheelchair up the steps of a platform for a local tram in Vienna. Austria has still not implemented Directive 2007/999 (fictitious) and there has not been any national law on the subject in Austria.
    c) Caroline attends an independent secondary school in the UK. Caroline’s leg is currently in plaster and she has to use crutches to walk. Her school bus has no ramp and passengers need to climb up three steep stairs to get onto the bus. In May 2011 Caroline suffered a serious head injury after falling down the steps of the bus and hitting her head on the kerb. The UK has not implemented Directive 2007/999 (fictitious). In 2001 the Public Transport Access (Rail) Act (fictitious) was passed. This is the only national law on the subject of public transport access facilities for people with special needs and applies only to trains. The equivalent measures planned to cover road transport were not passed.
    Advise Brigitta, Hans and Caroline as to any legal action they may or may not be entitled to take under European Law

    Any tips would be appreciated. Thanks.
    a) I don't think there is much Brigitta can do, Germany implemented the directive in time. Maybe she can rely on Facini Dori if the directive wasn't implemented correctly. In that case she has a right to claim damages from Germany (Francovich) But honestly I think it would be a hard case, because Germany implemented the directive in time and the lady in this case was mobile, she just slipped.
    b)April 2009 is before the implementation period has expired so normally he won't have a claim. In Adeneler the ECJ recognized a passive duty on national court to interpret national law in accordance with the directive. But as in this case there is no national law, the judge can’t interpret it that way.
    c) Maybe also Adeneler, but now there is an active duty to interpret with due regard to the directive. There are some limitation, not contra legem (1) and no criminal liability (2), respect general principles of law (3)

    Hopefully this helps
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Katharos703)
    a) I don't think there is much Brigitta can do, Germany implemented the directive in time. Maybe she can rely on Facini Dori if the directive wasn't implemented correctly. In that case she has a right to claim damages from Germany (Francovich) But honestly I think it would be a hard case, because Germany implemented the directive in time and the lady in this case was mobile, she just slipped.
    b)April 2009 is before the implementation period has expired so normally he won't have a claim. In Adeneler the ECJ recognized a passive duty on national court to interpret national law in accordance with the directive. But as in this case there is no national law, the judge can’t interpret it that way.
    c) Maybe also Adeneler, but now there is an active duty to interpret with due regard to the directive. There are some limitation, not contra legem (1) and no criminal liability (2), respect general principles of law (3)

    Hopefully this helps
    Thank you so much, You're my guardian angel !!! I feel bad for Brigitta though. Can't we use a purposive interpretation for her? She is mobile but being heavily pregnant close to term would mean she hast to be careful not to put herself or child at risk? I guess it depends on the stairs as well.... Was it a just a few stairs or something like in Convent Garden tube station in London 100-smthg stairs)... ?

    I got this "‘disabled person’ or ‘person with reduced mobility’ means any person whose mobility when using transport is reduced due to any physical disability (sensory or locomotor, permanent or temporary), intellectual disability or impairment, or any other cause of disability, or age, and whose situation needs appropriate attention and the adaptation to his or her particular needs of the service made available to all passengers." From http://europa.eu/legislation_summari.../l24132_en.htm
    This does mention interpretation problems whether pregnant women are included in the definition...

    Also found this, but I don't know if I can use it. "Mobility impairment refers to the inability of a person to use one or more of his/her extremities, or a lack of strength to walk, grasp, or lift objects. The use of a wheelchair, crutches, or a walker may be utilized to aid in mobility." from http://affnet.ucp.org/ucp_channeldoc...632-12632/6184
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Blush Babe)
    Thank you so much, You're my guardian angel !!! I feel bad for Brigitta though. Can't we use a purposive interpretation for her? She is mobile but being heavily pregnant close to term would mean she hast to be careful not to put herself or child at risk? I guess it depends on the stairs as well.... Was it a just a few stairs or something like in Convent Garden tube station in London 100-smthg stairs)... ?

    I got this "‘disabled person’ or ‘person with reduced mobility’ means any person whose mobility when using transport is reduced due to any physical disability (sensory or locomotor, permanent or temporary), intellectual disability or impairment, or any other cause of disability, or age, and whose situation needs appropriate attention and the adaptation to his or her particular needs of the service made available to all passengers." From http://europa.eu/legislation_summari.../l24132_en.htm
    This does mention interpretation problems whether pregnant women are included in the definition...

    Also found this, but I don't know if I can use it. "Mobility impairment refers to the inability of a person to use one or more of his/her extremities, or a lack of strength to walk, grasp, or lift objects. The use of a wheelchair, crutches, or a walker may be utilized to aid in mobility." from http://affnet.ucp.org/ucp_channeldoc...632-12632/6184
    I guess it depends on you're argumentation.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Katharos703)
    I guess it depends on you're argumentation.
    Please I need answers on this area. Can someone help.

    In February 2011, the Council of Ministers and the European Parliamentintroduced Directive 2011/43/EU (fictitious) requiring a limit beplaced on the noise emitted by street sweeper machines used in Member States bySeptember 2012. The motivation behind this move was that of environmentalhealth, as it would be to the general benefit of the public if noise levelswere reduced. However, the UK Department of the Environment is confident thatcurrent administrative practices and policies will cover the requirements ofthe Directive, and therefore the Government does not put forward a specific Actof Parliament dealing with this issue. Recently, George has been disturbed bythe noise of the local council’s street sweeper machine, and Mildred has beenbothered by a sweeper owned by Sweep-U-Like, a local firm who sweep the privateroad on which she lives. Both have suffered migraines and taken time off work.
    Advise George andMildred as to their possible rights and remedies under EU law, as theyare trying to enforce Directive 2011/43/EU in cases in the UK courts.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    ..
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    In October 2010 the EU issued a (ficititious) directive on retirement ages for men and women which require Member States ‘to pass legislation which ensures that men and women retire at the same age’. The directive was to be implemented by all Member States by 1st September 2012.
    The UK has not legislated in accordance with this directive. Instead, the UK enacts the (fictitious) Retirement Act 2012. This Act empowers an employer to set discriminatory retirement ages between their male and female employees. Grace works for Hardwicke Limited and has received notification that she has to retire next week, on her 60th birthday. This is in accordance with Hardwicke Limited’s policy which requires females to retire when they reach the age of 60 and males to retire at 65. Advise Grace what rights she may have under EU law. Would your answer differ if Grace had been employed by Ealing Borough Council?


    Guy's can you give me some advice, what should i cover ?

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Can anyone help???
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Katharos703)
    you always need to go through the same steps:

    1) Scope
    a. Does Union law applies, and what part of Union law?
    i. Union citizen or TCN
    ii. Whole internal situation
    iii. What kind of situation? (vertical or horizontal)
    iv. Case-law?
    2) Breach
    a. Problem in the case?
    i. Direct discrimination
    ii. Indirect discrimination
    iii. Hinder of free movement
    b. What article is breached?
    3) Justification
    a. Defense of the one (MS) who is breaching
    !! What is said about the breach is important for justification as well, because e.g. direct discrimination is harder to find a justification than for indirect discrimination, …
    4) Proportionality + human rights
    a. Problem v. defense
    i. Suitability (Is the measure suitable to attain the aim?)
    ii. Necessity (Is the rule necessary? This means that if there is a less restrictive measure or possibility, the rule they use is not.)

    If you follow this schema you must be able to solve the cases
    Hope it will help


    Hii, I came across this post and I am currently doing a problem question relating to direct and indirect effect. Here it is :


    David works for Pennine Tunnel PLC, a company created to build an underground road/rail link between Manchester and Leeds. It has a compulsory purchase power to acquire land along the route of the tunnel and a licence under Section 1 of the (fictitious) Private Sector Transport & Tunnels Act 2008 to build and operate the proposed tunnel.

    (Fictitious) Directive 99/2010 provides that any tunnel worker required to work for more than five hours in a tunnel site in any day must be paid three times his normal rate for any time worked beyond this. The Directive also provides that tunnel operators must make facilities, including toilet and shower facilities, available on-site. The deadline for transposition of the Directive was 31 December 2011.

    The Private Sector Transport & Tunnels Act 2008 provides that:-

    (1) employers must provide appropriate hygiene and rest facilities for use by employees engaged in tunnel construction: . . .

    (5) employees engaged in work in tunnels shall be entitled to be paid twice their normal rate in respect of any time worked by them in tunnels in excess of seven hours per day.

    David was frequently required to work more than five hours per day in the tunnel but Pennine Tunnel PLC only paid him at his normal rate up to seven hours per day and at double time for every additional hour. He has now developed a serious skin condition which has made him unfit to work and which the company admits was due to the lack of on-site washing facilities. Pennine Tunnel PLC has resisted his claims on the basis that it is in a horizontal relationship with him and the relationship is one of employer and employee only.

    (a) Advise David whether he can rely on the provisions of the Directive in bringing an action against Pennine Tunnel PLC in an English court.
    (b) Would it make any difference to your answer to (a) if the company did not have the powers and licence referred to above but was wholly owned by the United Kingdom Government?

    You should only consider direct effect and indirect effect in this question.


    I was wondering whether the format given above would be applicable in this question? Any other tips you may have are also welcomed
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    "A (fictitious) British law (the Relief of Poverty Act 2008) provides that people
    of working age, who are ordinarily resident within the UK, are entitled to a
    subsistence benefit which is intended to protect people from living in poverty.
    The benefit is paid inter alia to job seekers and to students in full time higher
    education. According to the fictitious Act, ‘foreign nationals’ whose right of
    residence arises only from the fact that they are seeking work in the UK or
    who have entered the UK only to seek social assistance, are excluded from
    receiving benefits under the Relief of Poverty Act. Foreign students may
    receive benefits under the Act only if their home state does not provide
    subsistence benefits for students.
    Nicolas, a Cypriot national, came to the UK on 1 July 2011 in answer to an
    advertisement seeking computer programmers. He worked for M-phasis, a
    company specialising in computer games, for two months. The terms on
    which he worked were as follows. Whenever M-phasis had an urgent
    programming need, in order to meet a delivery deadline, Nicolas would have
    ‘first refusal’ on the chance to do the work. For the first month, Nicolas worked
    nearly every day for M-phasis. However, thereafter M-phasis called him only a
    few times. Nicolas looked for alternative work, but was unable to find any.
    Nicolas then applied for a benefit under the Relief of Poverty Act. He was
    refused, on the basis that he had entered the UK to seek work. The UK
    authorities are now (December 2011) seeking to deport him. Nicolas argues
    that the term ‘foreign nationals’ in the Act must be interpreted consistently with
    EU law, and that it therefore means only nationals of a state outside the EU.
    Advise Nicolas:
    (a) of his rights in EU law, and
    (b) of the mechanisms available in EU law to enforce those rights."

    Does anyone have any advice on how to structure an answer for this?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Can someone help me with market access?

    what is the difference between market access and Keck?

    thanks!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    1. Assess the compatibility of each of the following with Articles (34 – 36 Treaty of Lisbon)

    i) In Italy, a law on consumer protection requires that a product labelled as ‘clinically proven’ must have had the clinical analysis undertaken by a laboratory in the country.

    ii) In Germany a law designed to cut down on unnecessary food packaging requires all retailers to sell seasonal fruit and vegetables ‘loose’ (i.e. without packaging). Retailers tend to import all ‘soft’ berry fruits from Italy and Spain.

    iii) Greece initially proposed legislation setting strict limits on the level of salt and saturated fats in ready-prepared meals, including pizzas. However, in agreement with national retailers the state has withdrawn the legislation in return for self-regulation by a code of conduct. Under this code, the retailers agree to reduce year on year the number of high fat and high salt products they sell. As a consequence, a leading European manufacturer of frozen pizzas established in Italy has found a significant drop in orders for its product from retailers Greece.

    iv) In France, to preserve the historic appearance of its main town squares, advertising images can be no larger than 1.5m x 2.5m. A new European lingerie company has launched a major advertising campaign with well known European sports stars modelling its underwear. It has hired a conceptual artist to develop enormous adverts than can be projected onto buildings. The adverts have won critical acclaim and the company has seen significant sales in its first six months of business. The company has been advised that such adverts will conflict with French laws and cannot be shown on their original scale. The conceptual artist has refused to permit scaled-down versions of these adverts.


    I'm trying to do this past paper,could someone please help me with things to implement? And Also what sorts of things would I need to include to get a 1st
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    hi
    could you help me out by completing my dissertation questionnaire? i REALLY need urgent reponses, PLEASE!!!
    http://kwiksurveys.com/s.asp?sid=gzk5ipxnk3dtsgh139044

    password is brigitte

    thanks
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hey guys,

    i'm really stuck on how to go about this question and was wondering if anyone could kindly help/direct me..


    ‘There is no doubt that the approach of the Court of Justice to Article 30 TFEU has differed dramatically from its approach to Article 110 TFEU. This is entirely justifiable. But there are a number of other aspects of the Court’s approach to these articles, which are deeply flawed. For example, it has been guilty of interpreting both articles in ways that place too much emphasis on the interests of the internal market without being sufficiently sensitive to the fiscal sovereignty, legitimate policy objectives and administrative needs of individual Member States.’

    Critically discuss this statement with reference to decided cases and academic opinion.


    Thank you x
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hi, I am needing some advice on how to structure an exam answer when asked about Free movement of goods, derogations. I have an example here: Measures liable to restrict or make less attractive the exercise of fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the treaty will be considered lawful in certain circumstances. Discuss this statement with reference to one or more of the fundamental freedoms. Also I have another example: Examine critically the extent to which member states are able to control the entry of goods from other member states into their states. (I understand this states entry so for this question exports are not necessary but I would like to know in case this kind of question arose) Pleaseee helpppppp
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Katharos703)
    you're welcome

    hey!

    I was wondering if you or anyone could please help me. Would you suggest that Brassiere du percheur redefines the rules set out in francovich such that the second limb is changed or does it make a distinction between cases where discretion has been left to member states and cases where no much discretion is afforded them?

    Thanks
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    hi , basically im stuck on how to answer a problem question about the free movement of people, if anyone knows about a structure i could use please inform me and what i need to include
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    hi , basically im stuck on how to answer a problem question about the free movement of people, if anyone knows about a structure i could use please inform me and what i need to include
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.