European
Union law prohibits financial and non-financial barriers to free movement of
goods. The last posts referred to financial barriers and the applicable law (arts 28-30 TFEU) in relation to the
prohibition of customs duties and charges having equivalent effect (CEEs); and art
110 TFEU and the prohibition of discriminatory internal taxation. Today, the
post introduces non-financial barriers to free movement of goods.
In
very simple terms, the applicable law
includes arts. 34-36 TFEU and relevant case law (European Court of Justice).
Art 34 TFEU: prohibits:
1.
quantitative
restrictions on imports (QRs)
2.
measures having
equivalent effect to quantitative restrictions (MEQRs).
Art 35 TFEU: same as art. 34 TFEU, but for exports.
Exceptions to this
principle:
1.
QRs and MEQRS may
be justified; that is, may not be unlawful, if fall within the derogations
listed in art. 36 TFEU.
2.
Certain
indistinctly applicable MEQRs (but NOT QRs or distinctly applicable MEQRs) may
be justified by case law rule (Cassis Rule of Reason/Mandatory Requirements).
3.
Certain selling
arrangements (prima facie = MEQRs) are excluded from art. 34 TFEU by case law
rule (Keck v Mithouard).
As this series is
centred on TERRITORIAL DISPUTES, the post now presents in very basic terms the
above. For a more in depth understanding, please refer to European Union law
bibliography.
Quantitative
Restrictions (QRs): defined by case
law (Geddo Case 2/73). National measures imposing numerical limit
(for example, bans, quotas) are prohibited unless they can be justified under
art. 36 TFEU.
Measures having
equivalent effect to quantitative restrictions (MEQRs): they have a broad concept that
includes rules on product packaging, content, shape, labelling, etc. that may
hinder inter-state trade. MEQRs are divided into two types (not covered on this
post).
Derogations (art.
36 TFEU): the prohibitions or
restrictions on imports and exports can be justified on certain grounds (for
example, public morality, public policy, public security, protection of health).
Relevant case law Cassis de Dijon Case 120/78 and Keck v Mithouard Case C-297 7
296/91.
The post tomorrow
will finish our presentation of European Union law relevant to the case of
Northern Ireland. Thereafter, from Monday the posts centre the analysis on
Northern Ireland; and how Brexit may affect positively their legal and
political status.
Jorge
Emilio Núñez
19th July 2018
No comments:
Post a Comment