Michael, a Dutch national living and running his own business in Utrecht, wishes to relocate to the United Kingdom.
Michael's business specialises in the manufacture and exporting of skiing helmets. In the Netherlands, he has been granted a patent for his genetically engineered waterproof and incredibly strong membrane. His helmets are coated with this material.
The United Kingdom authorities impounded the latest batch of helmets for a month after they were imported through the Channel Tunnel. Michael was informed that they needed to be tested as there had been recent reports in the United Kingdom press of health risks with genetically engineered materials. For the tests Michael was charged 5% of the total value of each shipment.
Furthermore, the United Kingdom authorities require sellers of ski helmets to pay a registration fee of £5 per helmet, which is paid into an injury compensation fund for skiers with head injuries. There are currently no United Kingdom manufacturers of ski helmets, though a number of firms manufacture snowboarding helmets for which there is no registration fee payable.
The Council and European Parliament have recently adopted a Regulation using the ordinary legislative procedure, which prohibits the manufacture of genetically engineered skiing goods on the basis of health concerns, even though no research has been conducted about this.
- Critically determine if the charges for testing can be applied by the United Kingdom authorities to Michael’s imported skiing helmets and if the registration fee is compatible with EU law?
- Discuss how Michael can challenge the adoption of the Regulation in the CJEU through Art 263 TFEU?
x Turn on thread page Beta
EU Law Problem Question - FMG; Article 263 TFEU watch
- Thread Starter
- 11-02-2018 12:22