Inhoudsopgave
Articles...............................................................................................................................................1
Case law.............................................................................................................................................1
Methodology week 1 - Free movement of persons............................................................................8
Methodology week 2 – 101 TFEU prohibition of anti-competitive agreements (cartel)...................11
Methodology week 3 – 102 TFEU The abuse of a dominant position...............................................16
Methodology week 4 – Free movement of workers 45 TFEU vs. persons 20 TFEU...........................22
I. Free movement of workers 45 TFEU Framework (economically active)...................................22
Methodology week 5 European citizenship......................................................................................25
Internal situation 20 TFEU, only case law........................................................................................28
Derived rights of residence..........................................................................................................28
Withdrawal Dutch nationality......................................................................................................29
Methodology week 6 discrimination in employment.......................................................................30
Methodology week 7 AFSJ and EAW................................................................................................35
Articles
The effect of EU law upon national law:
1. Direct Effect: means you can directly invoke the law before a national court Conditions:
clear, unconditional (does not contain a reservation) and does not depend on an implementing
measure
-1. Horizontal direct effect: relationship between individuals, like against an employer
-2. Vertical direct effect: relationship between individual and state
2. Indirect Effect: All national law must be interpreted in accordance with all EU law by all
national authorities. No direct effect, than no instrument to evoke, can do nothing with
provision, look national law, not prohibit than court cannot do anything.
Case law
Week 1:
Gebhard: advocato legal services and establishment
-legal services
-Gebhard para 25/26
Freedom of Establishment: Article 49 TFEU.
o Participation on a stable and continuous basis in another MS (25)
o Fixed establishment through another MS (MS B). Set up or perform. Always
need an establishment in another MS. If you only have a fixed establishment
in State A, and you go to State B, then freedom of establishment is not
applicable.
Freedom (to provide) of Services Article 56 TFEU.
o Remuneration: article 57 TFEU.
o Providing services on temporary nature (26)Para 27: regularity, periodicity
or continuity (gebhard).
o doesn’t mean that service provider cannot equip from an office.
- Restrictions on market access are prohibited - (Gebhard, para 37)
-36-39: in essence mutual recognition (recognize eachothers diploma), but there can be
additional conditions
,-Gebhard: para 37 restrictions on free movements, sums up how they interpreted the four
freedoms. Prohibited unless four conditions are fulfilled. Measures are sometimes justified.
rule of reason, mandatory requirements.
- When a national has permanently established him- or herself, there is also the right to set up
agencies, branches or subsidiaries (para. 24).
Josemans: providing of services soft drinks, coffeeshop – direct discrimination
-42: service need to be lawful otherwise prohibited and therefore fall outside of the scope of
the freedoms of movement
-41: Unless strictly controlled by competent authorities are permitted
-46-49: sell food and drinks
service court said here he can successfully rely on the free movement of services
provision (49)
-irrelevant that lawful activities are small.
-65: drug order part of maintenance public order and health
-50: If free movement of goods aspect entirely secondary to services services will apply
§ 69 – 70: Discriminatory however; Combatting drug tourism as part of the maintenance of
public order and public health. The measure is suitable and does not go beyond what is
necessary
Schindler: p.20 lotteries strictly regulated, gambling
-25: Lottery activities are services
-26: services provided for remuneration (money), so economic activity of providing services.
-29: cross border services
-45: national legislation with a prohibition on lotteries is an obstacle to the freedom to provide
services.
-62: prohibition to participate is not an unjustified interference, necessary part protection.
- The organization and participation in lotteries and games of chance
-para 60-61: how much can a member state decides? In case of gambling, a lot of
problematic behavior, measure of member states is quite big. proportionality is
easier to meet in case of gambling.
-Organization of advertisement unlawful activity. not economic free movement rules
not applicable court of justice 41/42: no that’s not true, not prohibited even though strictly
regulated.
Week 2
Eturas UAB (travel agency, system message enough for concerted practice,)
-50: Online statement constitutes breach 101, aware of message than they participated in
concerted practice, unless they publicly distanced themselves from that practice or reported it
to the administrative authorities or other evidence. Burden on proving infringement lays on
party or authority alleging the infringement.
-If system message has been sent, not enough evidence to have knowledge because receiver.
If you act upon information on mail then evidence.
Irish Beef case (horizontal agreement, object box, limit production)
-15: prohibition in 81 EC; prohibited that agreement/cp have as its object or effect the
prevention, restriction or distortion.
16: The assessment of an agreement must be made in the light of economical context of the
agreement.
, 37: such a measure constitutes an obstacle.
40: agreement with such features (limit production) has as its object the prevention, restriction
or distortion. Of competition within the meaning of 81 EC.
CECED:
-market private washing machines.
-18 objectives of agreement
-27: CECED is agreement
-46 agreement has appreciable effect on trade
Week 3
Commission notice 97/c 372/03
-15 e.v. three factors of competitive constraint to identify the relevant markets: demand and
supply substitutability and potential competition.
EC; google 1 – p. 42 summary
-exclusivity clausules, prohibition place search adverts
-competitors were prevented from placing search adverts in most visible parts
-control how many clicks
google dominant and abused its position because rivals could not compete in online search
advertisement
EC; google 2
-illegal advantage to other google product in other market
EC; google 3
- illegal tying search and browser apps
EC; whatsapp and facebook
-Whatsapp and facebook not close competitors
Week 4
Lawry Blum (become teacher, :
-17: A worker 48(1) is someone who 1. Provides services for a certain period of time, 2.
Under the supervision or direction of another person and 3. In exchange for remuneration.
-20: activity should be for remuneration, does not make sense that there is no economic
nature.
-21: paying below salary does not prevent from being a worker
-22 trainee must be regarded as a worker , irrespective legal nature of employment
relationship
-27: employment in public service 48(4); “should be interpreted as meaning those posts which
involve direct or indirect participation in the exercise of power conferred by public law and in
the discharge of functions whose purpose is to safeguard the general interest of the state...and
which therefore require a special relationship of allegiance to the state
-29 period of prepatory services is not regarded as employment in public services.
Articles...............................................................................................................................................1
Case law.............................................................................................................................................1
Methodology week 1 - Free movement of persons............................................................................8
Methodology week 2 – 101 TFEU prohibition of anti-competitive agreements (cartel)...................11
Methodology week 3 – 102 TFEU The abuse of a dominant position...............................................16
Methodology week 4 – Free movement of workers 45 TFEU vs. persons 20 TFEU...........................22
I. Free movement of workers 45 TFEU Framework (economically active)...................................22
Methodology week 5 European citizenship......................................................................................25
Internal situation 20 TFEU, only case law........................................................................................28
Derived rights of residence..........................................................................................................28
Withdrawal Dutch nationality......................................................................................................29
Methodology week 6 discrimination in employment.......................................................................30
Methodology week 7 AFSJ and EAW................................................................................................35
Articles
The effect of EU law upon national law:
1. Direct Effect: means you can directly invoke the law before a national court Conditions:
clear, unconditional (does not contain a reservation) and does not depend on an implementing
measure
-1. Horizontal direct effect: relationship between individuals, like against an employer
-2. Vertical direct effect: relationship between individual and state
2. Indirect Effect: All national law must be interpreted in accordance with all EU law by all
national authorities. No direct effect, than no instrument to evoke, can do nothing with
provision, look national law, not prohibit than court cannot do anything.
Case law
Week 1:
Gebhard: advocato legal services and establishment
-legal services
-Gebhard para 25/26
Freedom of Establishment: Article 49 TFEU.
o Participation on a stable and continuous basis in another MS (25)
o Fixed establishment through another MS (MS B). Set up or perform. Always
need an establishment in another MS. If you only have a fixed establishment
in State A, and you go to State B, then freedom of establishment is not
applicable.
Freedom (to provide) of Services Article 56 TFEU.
o Remuneration: article 57 TFEU.
o Providing services on temporary nature (26)Para 27: regularity, periodicity
or continuity (gebhard).
o doesn’t mean that service provider cannot equip from an office.
- Restrictions on market access are prohibited - (Gebhard, para 37)
-36-39: in essence mutual recognition (recognize eachothers diploma), but there can be
additional conditions
,-Gebhard: para 37 restrictions on free movements, sums up how they interpreted the four
freedoms. Prohibited unless four conditions are fulfilled. Measures are sometimes justified.
rule of reason, mandatory requirements.
- When a national has permanently established him- or herself, there is also the right to set up
agencies, branches or subsidiaries (para. 24).
Josemans: providing of services soft drinks, coffeeshop – direct discrimination
-42: service need to be lawful otherwise prohibited and therefore fall outside of the scope of
the freedoms of movement
-41: Unless strictly controlled by competent authorities are permitted
-46-49: sell food and drinks
service court said here he can successfully rely on the free movement of services
provision (49)
-irrelevant that lawful activities are small.
-65: drug order part of maintenance public order and health
-50: If free movement of goods aspect entirely secondary to services services will apply
§ 69 – 70: Discriminatory however; Combatting drug tourism as part of the maintenance of
public order and public health. The measure is suitable and does not go beyond what is
necessary
Schindler: p.20 lotteries strictly regulated, gambling
-25: Lottery activities are services
-26: services provided for remuneration (money), so economic activity of providing services.
-29: cross border services
-45: national legislation with a prohibition on lotteries is an obstacle to the freedom to provide
services.
-62: prohibition to participate is not an unjustified interference, necessary part protection.
- The organization and participation in lotteries and games of chance
-para 60-61: how much can a member state decides? In case of gambling, a lot of
problematic behavior, measure of member states is quite big. proportionality is
easier to meet in case of gambling.
-Organization of advertisement unlawful activity. not economic free movement rules
not applicable court of justice 41/42: no that’s not true, not prohibited even though strictly
regulated.
Week 2
Eturas UAB (travel agency, system message enough for concerted practice,)
-50: Online statement constitutes breach 101, aware of message than they participated in
concerted practice, unless they publicly distanced themselves from that practice or reported it
to the administrative authorities or other evidence. Burden on proving infringement lays on
party or authority alleging the infringement.
-If system message has been sent, not enough evidence to have knowledge because receiver.
If you act upon information on mail then evidence.
Irish Beef case (horizontal agreement, object box, limit production)
-15: prohibition in 81 EC; prohibited that agreement/cp have as its object or effect the
prevention, restriction or distortion.
16: The assessment of an agreement must be made in the light of economical context of the
agreement.
, 37: such a measure constitutes an obstacle.
40: agreement with such features (limit production) has as its object the prevention, restriction
or distortion. Of competition within the meaning of 81 EC.
CECED:
-market private washing machines.
-18 objectives of agreement
-27: CECED is agreement
-46 agreement has appreciable effect on trade
Week 3
Commission notice 97/c 372/03
-15 e.v. three factors of competitive constraint to identify the relevant markets: demand and
supply substitutability and potential competition.
EC; google 1 – p. 42 summary
-exclusivity clausules, prohibition place search adverts
-competitors were prevented from placing search adverts in most visible parts
-control how many clicks
google dominant and abused its position because rivals could not compete in online search
advertisement
EC; google 2
-illegal advantage to other google product in other market
EC; google 3
- illegal tying search and browser apps
EC; whatsapp and facebook
-Whatsapp and facebook not close competitors
Week 4
Lawry Blum (become teacher, :
-17: A worker 48(1) is someone who 1. Provides services for a certain period of time, 2.
Under the supervision or direction of another person and 3. In exchange for remuneration.
-20: activity should be for remuneration, does not make sense that there is no economic
nature.
-21: paying below salary does not prevent from being a worker
-22 trainee must be regarded as a worker , irrespective legal nature of employment
relationship
-27: employment in public service 48(4); “should be interpreted as meaning those posts which
involve direct or indirect participation in the exercise of power conferred by public law and in
the discharge of functions whose purpose is to safeguard the general interest of the state...and
which therefore require a special relationship of allegiance to the state
-29 period of prepatory services is not regarded as employment in public services.
