FMOG (Non- Fiscal) 0.0 / 5 ? LawEU LAWUniversityOther Created by: alexbennett633Created on: 21-05-19 14:33 Article 34 TFEU Prohibits QR and MEEQR 1 of 30 Comission v France (angry farmers) Art 34 imposes obligation to act- MS are obliged to maintain FMOG. can infringe art 34 by omission 2 of 30 Schmidberger v Austria FMOG have to be balanced against competing interests, environmental protection and was not intended to disrupt FMOG 3 of 30 QR- Greddo Measures which have a total or partial restraint on imports, exports or goods in transit 4 of 30 Henn and Darby (QR) i accept 0 such goods= total ban on import- falls under QR 5 of 30 Rosengren (QR) Ban on imports for personal use constitute QR 6 of 30 MEEQR Measures having an equivalent effect to Quanititative restrictions 7 of 30 Dassonville Formula capable of hindering directly, or indirectly, actually or potentially intra community trade 8 of 30 Distinctly apllicable measure (art. 2 CRD) Targets imports and discriminates against them e.g. Dassonville 9 of 30 Buy Irish Campaign to induce irish goods at detriment of imported goods- distinctly applicable measure- nationality is the discriminating factor 10 of 30 Indistinctly applicable measure No discrimination of the face. Byt have a burden on goods to benefit home produced. 11 of 30 Cassis De Dijon German law said it didnt constitute liquor (under 25%) so French would have to repackage which would cost- Indistinctly applicable measure 12 of 30 Rau Margerine- repackaging (indistinctly applicable measure) 13 of 30 Germany (Beer purity) Indistinctly applicable measure 14 of 30 Foire Gras Consider both direct and potential impact on market 15 of 30 Justifications Distinctly applicable measure- ART 36) Indistinctly applicable measure Art 36 and/or mandatory requirements 16 of 30 Art 36 Derogations: Public morality, protection of health and life (have to be proportinate) 17 of 30 Henn and Darby (PM) Restricting import of ****- QR- Justified- yes- protecting public morality 18 of 30 Conengate sex dolls not allowed- QR- not justified because they were already in shops and therefore it was a discguised restriction 19 of 30 Sandoz Protection of health and life- scientific minortity evidence is enough 20 of 30 Rosengren Measure not proportinate- applied to all people not just young- not protection of health and life 21 of 30 Mandatory Requirements 1) effectiveness of fiscal supervision 2) Protection of public health 3) fairness to commercial transactions 4) defence of consumer 22 of 30 Keck 2 categories of measures 1) product requirement 2) CSA-outside scope of art 34 but must not discriminate 23 of 30 CSA relates to manner in which product is sold 24 of 30 Punto Casa No sunday trading- CSA- fell outside scope of art 34 25 of 30 Familia Press No prizes in cross word- not a CSA as amendments would have to be made- justified to contain price diversity 26 of 30 Dynamic Median Movie certificates- Not CSA- product requirement - Product requirement- could be justified- public interest 27 of 30 Di Agostini Dino mag- fell within scope of 34- could be justified protection of over commercialisation 28 of 30 Gourmet international alcohol booklet ban- ban was too broad- did not apply equally because it did not apply equally in law and in facr 29 of 30 Commission v Italy (trailers) notion of 'hindering market access' when 1) hinder market access under dassonville 2) product requirement 3) any other rule that would hinder MA 30 of 30
Comments
No comments have yet been made