Freedom to Provide/Receive Services Flashcards Preview

European Union Law > Freedom to Provide/Receive Services > Flashcards

Flashcards in Freedom to Provide/Receive Services Deck (32)
Loading flashcards...
1
Q

Which case confirmed direct effect to Art 56 freedom to provide services?

A

Van Binsbergen

2
Q

Which three elements need to be satisfied for an undertaking to fall under a service?

A
  1. Remuneration;
  2. Genuine and effective economic activity;
  3. Cross-border element
3
Q

What was regarded as a service in the case of Jany?

A

Prostitution

4
Q

What was considered a service in the case of SPUC v Grogan?

A

Abortion clinics

5
Q

What did the CJ decide was a genuine and economic activity in Deliege?

A

Professional sport

6
Q

What did the CJ add in Deliege about remuneration?

A

They said remuneration didn’t have to come from the recipient of the service. In the case of professional sport it would often come from sponsors.

7
Q

What was not an economic activity in the case of SPUC v Grogan?

A

The distribution of information about abortion clinics.

8
Q

Which case established that Article 56 would not apply where all the relevant elements are confined within a single MS?

A

Debauve

9
Q

In which case was a local tax on satellite dishes held to have breached Art 56 because it reduced the broadcast of international tv and radio?

A

de Coster

10
Q

What does the case of Hubbard v Hamburger tell us about the cross-border element in Art 56?

A

The provider and recipient of the service do not have to be in separate MS

11
Q

What four rights are protected by Art 56?

A
  1. Right to move and reside to provide services;
  2. Right to move and reside to receive services;
  3. Right to operate a business;
  4. Social advantages such as social housing
12
Q

Which case establishes that Art 56 also grants a right of residence to receive services?

A

Luisi v Ministero del Tesoro

13
Q

In Luisi what could be included in ‘receiving services’?

A

Education, healthcare, tourism

14
Q

Which case confirmed that direct and indirect discrimination against a business providing services in another MS are covered in Art 56?

A

Gouda

15
Q

What was found to directly discriminatory in van Binsbergen?

A

A Dutch law only allowing Dutch residents to represent in court. Van Binsbergen was a Dutch lawyer but had moved to Belgium.

16
Q

How might a residency requirement demanded to perform a profession not be considered indirectly discriminatory?

A

If it was applied to all within a MS and it could justified for the enforcement of professional conduct

17
Q

What was found to be in breach of Articles 56, 49 and 18 TFEU in Commission v Italy (Italian Housing)?

A

The restriction of social housing and a reduced mortgage to Italian nationals only. The CJ said it should be available to the self-employed as well.

18
Q

In Cowan v Tresor Public what was Cowan at first refused but then granted in his appeal to the Court?

A

Cowan was mugged on holiday in Paris and refused compensation from the French Criminal Injuries scheme on the basis of his nationality. The CJ ruled that he was allowed his compensation as a lack of finance inhibited his enjoyment of other services as a tourist.

19
Q

In Commission v Germany (Insurance Services) when did the CJ decide a restriction in services could be justified?

A

If the restriction was indistinctly applicable and in the public interest

20
Q

What was the Commission saying was against Article 56 in Commission v Germany (Insurance Services)?

A

The Germans were prohibiting the sale of insurance without a German agent installed in Germany.

21
Q

What was Germany’s defence in Commission v Germany (Insurance Services)?

A

The law restricting the sale of insurance without a German agent installed in Germany was there to protect policyholders.

22
Q

How did Sager v Dennemeyer Ltd clarify the status of indistinctly applicable measures in relation to restriction of services? What four stage test did it apply?

A

It said MS may impose national restrictions as long as they are:

  1. Imperative for the public interest;
  2. Indistinctly applicable (ie non-discriminatory);
  3. Objectively necessary to ensure compliance with professional standards;
  4. Necessary to attain an objective
23
Q

What is the rule in Sager comparable to in free movement of goods?

A

Rule of Reason

24
Q

What national rule was found to be disproportionate in Commission v France (Tour Guides)?

A

A national law requiring tour guides to have a licence.

25
Q

In Schindler v HM Customs and Excise how did the UK successfully defend their restriction on provision of lottery services?

A

The UK argued the restriction protected the public from fraud and gambling.

26
Q

In Belgium v Humbel what did the CJ was not a service and so non-nationals could be charged at a higher rate?

A

Secondary education

27
Q

Why did the CJ not view secondary education as a service?

A

The CJ held that courses within a national education system do not provide services in return for remuneration ie they are not a commercial agreement but provided for by the State.

28
Q

Which case distinguishes secondary education from vocational and University degrees?

A

Gravier v City of Liege

29
Q

What are the facts in Kohll?

A

Mr. Kohll had taken his daughter to Germany for orthodontic treatment. On claiming the costs on his return to Luxembourg, he was refused. Luxembourg authorities were found in breach of Art 56 for requiring nationals who sought medical treatment in another MS to get permission from them first for the reimbursement.

30
Q

In which two cases were individuals allowed to seek medical treatment in another MS and claim back from their own national free health service?

A
  1. Geraets-Smits/Peerbooms

2. Watts v Bedford Primary Health Care Trust

31
Q

In Muller-Faure when did the CJ say there may be a restriction on provision of health services?

A

When public health is a concern and if the restriction meets the Sager rules

32
Q

The Commission originally wanted to pass the Services Directive on the basis of the principle of ‘home regulation’. What is ‘home regulation’? Why was it rejected?

A

Home regulation means that service providers licensed in one MS could provide their services in any other. MS rejected the idea on the likelihood that service providers would flock to one MS to obtain their licences and there would be a decrease in professional standards across Europe.