European single market

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

European single market
  Non-EU states which participate in the single market via the EEA or are in bilateral agreements with the EU
(see integration of non-EU states)
Policy ofEuropean Union
Official languagesLanguages of the European Union
Demonym(s)European
TypeSingle market
Member states
4 (non-EU) EFTA states
Establishment1 January 1993
Area
• Total
4,986,038 km2 (1,925,120 sq mi)
• EU
4,324,782 km2
(1,669,808 sq mi)
Population
• 2021 estimate
448,350,000
• EU 2021
estimate
441,350,000
GDP (nominal)2020 estimate
• Total
US$16.3 trillion[1]
• Per capita
US$39,537
CurrencyEuro (EUR)

The European single market, also known as the European internal market or the European common market, is the

goods, capital, services, and people, known collectively as the "four freedoms".[2][3][4][5]
This is achieved through common rules and standards that all participating states are legally committed to follow.

Any potential EU accession candidates are required to agree to association agreements with the EU during the negotiation which must be implemented prior to accession[citation needed]. In addition, through three individual agreements on a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) with the EU, the post-Soviet countries of Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine have also been granted limited access to the single market in selected sectors.[6] Turkey has access to the free movement of some goods via its membership in the European Union–Turkey Customs Union.[7] The United Kingdom left the European single market on 31 December 2020. An agreement was reached between the UK Government and European Commission to align Northern Ireland on rules for goods with the European single market, to maintain an open border on the island of Ireland.[8]

The market is intended to increase competition, labour specialisation, and economies of scale, allowing goods and factors of production to move to the area where they are most valued, thus improving the efficiency of the allocation of resources. It is also intended to drive economic integration whereby the once separate economies of the member states become integrated within a single EU-wide economy.[9] The creation of the internal market as a seamless, single market is an ongoing process, with the integration of the service industry still containing gaps.[10] According to a 2019 estimate, because of the single market the GDP of member countries is on average 9 percent higher than it would be if tariff and non-tariff restrictions were in place.[11]

History

One of the core objectives of the European Economic Community (EEC) upon its establishment in 1957 was the development of a common market offering free movement of goods, service, people and capital. Free movement of goods was established in principle through the customs union between its then-six member states.

However, the EEC struggled to enforce a single market due to the absence of strong decision-making structures. Because of protectionist attitudes, it was difficult to replace intangible barriers with mutually recognized standards and common regulations.

In the 1980s, when the economy of the EEC began to lag behind the rest of the developed world, Margaret Thatcher sent Lord Cockfield to the Delors Commission to take the initiative to attempt to relaunch the common market. Cockfield wrote and published a White Paper in 1985 identifying 300 measures to be addressed in order to complete a single market.[12][13][14] The White Paper was well received and led to the adoption of the Single European Act, a treaty which reformed the decision-making mechanisms of the EEC and set a deadline of 31 December 1992 for the completion of a single market. In the end, it was launched on 1 January 1993.[15]

The new approach, pioneered at the Delors Commission, combined positive and negative integration, relying upon minimum rather than exhaustive harmonisation. Negative integration consists of prohibitions imposed on member states banning discriminatory behaviour and other restrictive practices. Positive integration consists of approximating laws and standards. Especially important (and controversial) in this respect is the adoption of harmonising legislation under Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).

The commission also relied upon the

Cassis de Dijon[16] jurisprudence, under which member states were obliged to recognise goods which had been legally produced in another member state, unless the member state could justify the restriction by reference to a mandatory requirement. Harmonisation would only be used to overcome barriers created by trade restrictions which survived the Cassis mandatory requirements test, and to ensure essential standards where there was a risk of a race to the bottom
. Thus, harmonisation was largely used to ensure basic health and safety standards were met.

By 1992 about 90% of the issues had been resolved

In 1997 the

Amsterdam Treaty abolished physical barriers across the internal market by incorporating the Schengen Area within the competences of the EU. The Schengen Agreement implements the abolition of border controls between most member states, common rules on visas, and police and judicial co-operation.[20]

The official goal of the

Lisbon Treaty came into force in 2009, however, some areas pertaining to parts of the four freedoms (especially in the field of services) had not yet been completely opened. Those, along with further work on the economic and monetary union, would see the EU move further to a European Home Market.[17]

Four Freedoms

The "Four Freedoms" of the single market are:

  • Free movement of goods
  • Free movement of capital
  • Freedom to establish and provide services
  • Free movement of people

Goods

The range of "goods" (or "products") covered by the term "free movement of goods" "is as wide as the range of goods in existence".[22] Goods are only covered if they have economic value, i.e. they can be valued in money and are capable of forming the subject of commercial transactions. Works of art, coins which are no longer in circulation and water are noted as examples of "goods".[22] Fish are goods, but a European Court of Justice ruling in 1999 stated that fishing rights (or fishing permits) are not goods, but a provision of service. The ruling further explains that, both capital and service can be valued in money and are capable of forming the subject of commercial transactions, but they are not goods.[23]

Council Regulation (EC) 2679/98 of 7 December 1998, on the functioning of the internal market in relation to the

free movement of goods among the Member States, was aimed at preventing obstacles to the free movement of goods attributable to "action or inaction" by a Member State. The regulation empowered the Commission to request intervention by a Member State when the actions of private individuals were creating an "obstacle" to free movement of goods. A resolution was adopted by the Council and member state government representatives on the same day, under which the member states agreed to take action where necessary to protect the free movement of goods and other freedoms, and to issue public information where there were disruptions, including their efforts to address obstacles to free movement of goods.[24]

Customs duties and taxation

The customs union of the European Union removes customs barriers between member states and operates a common customs policy towards external countries, with the aim "to ensure normal conditions of competition and to remove all restrictions of a fiscal nature capable of hindering the free movement of goods within the Common Market".[25]

Aspects of the EU Customs area extend to a number of non-EU-member states, such as Andorra, Monaco, San Marino and Turkey, under separately negotiated arrangements. The United Kingdom agreed on a trade deal with the European Union on 24 December 2020, which was signed by Prime Minister Boris Johnson on 30 December 2020.[citation needed]

Customs duties

Article 30 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union ("TFEU") prohibits border levies between member states on both European Union Customs Union produce and non-EUCU (third-country) produce. Under Article 29 of the TFEU, customs duty applicable to third country products are levied at the point of entry into EUCU, and once within the EU external border goods may circulate freely between member states.[27]

Under the operation of the Single European Act, customs border controls between member states have been largely abandoned. Physical inspections on imports and exports have been replaced mainly by audit controls and risk analysis.[citation needed]

Charges having equivalent effect to customs duties

Article 30 of the TFEU prohibits not only customs duties but also charges having equivalent effect. The European Court of Justice defined "charge having equivalent effect" in Commission v Italy.

[A]ny pecuniary charge, however small and whatever its designation and mode of application, which is imposed unilaterally on domestic or foreign goods by reason of the fact that they cross a frontier, and which is not a customs duty in the strict sense, constitutes a charge having an equivalent effect... even if it is not imposed for the benefit of the state, is not discriminatory or protective in effect and if the product on which the charge is imposed is not in competition with any domestic product.[28]

A charge is a customs duty if it is proportionate to the value of the goods; if it is proportionate to the quantity, it is a charge having equivalent effect to a customs duty.[29]

There are three exceptions to the prohibition on charges imposed when goods cross a border, listed in Case 18/87 Commission v Germany. A charge is not a customs duty or charge having equivalent effect if:

  • it relates to a general system of internal dues applied systematically and in accordance with the same criteria to domestic products and imported products alike,[30]
  • if it constitutes payment for a service in fact rendered to the economic operator of a sum in proportion to the service,[31] or
  • subject to certain conditions, if it attaches to inspections carried out to fulfil obligations imposed by Union law.[32]
Taxation

Article 110 of the TFEU provides:

No Member State shall impose, directly or indirectly, on the products of other member states any internal taxation of any kind in excess of that imposed directly or indirectly on similar domestic products.
Furthermore, no Member State shall impose on the products of other member states any internal taxation of such a nature as to afford indirect protection to other products.

In the taxation of rum case, the ECJ stated that:

The Court has consistently held that the purpose of Article 90 EC [now Article 110], as a whole, is to ensure the free movement of goods between the member states under normal conditions of competition, by eliminating all forms of protection which might result from the application of discriminatory internal taxation against products from other member states, and to guarantee absolute neutrality of internal taxation as regards competition between domestic and imported products".[33]

Quantitative and equivalent restrictions

Free movement of goods within the

Buy Irish" company that had government appointees.[39]

It also means states can be responsible for private actors. For instance, in

TFEU article 11.[42] The Eyssen v Netherlands case from 1981 outlined a disagreement between the science community and the Dutch government whether niacin in cheese posed a public risk. As public risk falls under article 36, meaning that a quantitative restriction can be imposed, it justified the import restriction against the Eyssen cheese company by the Dutch government.[43]

More generally, it has been increasingly acknowledged that fundamental human rights should take priority over all trade rules. So, in

suitable to achieve the aim, (2) be necessary, so that a less restrictive measure could not achieve the same result, and (3) be reasonable in balancing the interests of free trade with interests in article 36.[46]

Austrian Alps on the Brenner Autobahn. The Court of Justice recognised fundamental rights take priority over free trade.[47]

Often rules apply to all goods neutrally, but may have a greater practical effect on imports than domestic products. For such "indirect" discriminatory (or "indistinctly applicable") measures the

Court of Justice found that a Belgian law requiring all margarine to be in cube shaped packages infringed article 34, and was not justified by the pursuit of consumer protection. The argument that Belgians would believe it was butter if it was not cube shaped was disproportionate: it would "considerably exceed the requirements of the object in view" and labelling would protect consumers "just as effectively".[57]

In a 2003 case,

Court of Justice held that an Italian law prohibiting motorcycles or mopeds from pulling trailers infringed article 34.[59] Again, the law applied neutrally to everyone, but disproportionately affected importers, because Italian companies did not make trailers. This was not a product requirement, but the Court reasoned that the prohibition would deter people from buying it: it would have "a considerable influence on the behaviour of consumers" that "affects the access of that product to the market".[60]
It would require justification under article 36, or as a mandatory requirement.

In contrast to product requirements or other laws that hinder

Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, the EU harmonised restrictions on restrictions on marketing and advertising, to forbid conduct that distorts average consumer behaviour, is misleading or aggressive, and sets out a list of examples that count as unfair.[66] Increasingly, states have to give mutual recognition to each other's standards of regulation, while the EU has attempted to harmonise minimum ideals of best practice. The attempt to raise standards is hoped to avoid a regulatory "race to the bottom", while allowing consumers access to goods from around the continent.[citation needed
]

Capital

Free movement of

company shares or financial assets, or government approval requirements for foreign investment. By contrast, taxation of capital, including corporate tax, capital gains tax and financial transaction tax, are not affected so long as they do not discriminate by nationality. According to the Capital Movement Directive 1988, Annex I, 13 categories of capital which must move free are covered.[67]

In

TFEU article 345.[73]

Capital within the EU may be transferred in any amount from one country to another (except that Greece currently[

TARGET, for large euro transactions.[76]

The final stage of completely free movement of capital was thought to require a

TFEU articles 119 and 127, the objective of the European Central Bank and other central banks ought to be price stability. This has been criticised for apparently being superior to the objective of full employment in the Treaty on European Union article 3.[78]

Within the building on the Investment Plan for Europe, for a closer integration of capital markets, in 2015, the Commission adopted the Action Plan on Building a Capital Markets Union (CMU) setting out a list of key measures to achieve a true single market for capital in Europe, which deepens the existing Banking Union, because this revolves around disintermediated, market-based forms of financing, which should represent an alternative to the traditionally predominant (in Europe) bank-based financing channel.[79] The EU's political and economic context call for strong and competitive capital markets to finance the EU economy.[80] The CMU project is a political signal to strengthen the single market as a project of all 28 Member States,[81] instead of just the Eurozone countries, and sent a strong signal to the UK to remain an active part of the EU, before Brexit.[82]

Services

As well as creating rights for "workers" who generally lack bargaining power in the market,[83] the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union or TFEU also protects the "freedom of establishment" in article 49, and "freedom to provide services" in article 56.[84]

Establishment

In

Commission v Italy the Court of Justice held that a requirement for lawyers in Italy to comply with maximum tariffs unless there was an agreement with a client was not a restriction.[91] The Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice held the commission had not proven that this had any object or effect of limiting practitioners from entering the market.[92] Therefore, there was no prima facie infringement freedom of establishment that needed to be justified.[citation needed
]

In regard to companies, the

Überseering BV v Nordic Construction GmbH the Court of Justice held that a German court could not deny a Dutch building company the right to enforce a contract in Germany on the basis that it was not validly incorporated in Germany. Although restrictions on freedom of establishment could be justified by creditor protection, labour rights to participate in work, or the public interest in collecting taxes, denial of capacity went too far: it was an "outright negation" of the right of establishment.[98] However, in Cartesio Oktató és Szolgáltató bt the Court of Justice affirmed again that because corporations are created by law, they are in principle subject to any rules for formation that a state of incorporation wishes to impose. This meant that the Hungarian authorities could prevent a company from shifting its central administration to Italy while it still operated and was incorporated in Hungary.[99] Thus, the court draws a distinction between the right of establishment for foreign companies (where restrictions must be justified), and the right of the state to determine conditions for companies incorporated in its territory,[100] although it is not entirely clear why.[101]

Types of service

The "freedom to provide services" under

social security case, and was told he could not continue because Dutch law said only people established in the Netherlands could give legal advice.[103] The Court of Justice held that the freedom to provide services applied, it was directly effective, and the rule was probably unjustified: having an address in the member state would be enough to pursue the legitimate aim of good administration of justice.[104]

Case law states that the treaty provisions relating to the freedom to provide services do not apply in situations where the service, service provider and other relevant facts are confined within a single member state.[105] An early Council Directive from 26 July 1971 included works contracts within the scope of services, and provided for the abolition of restrictions on the freedom to provide services in respect of public works contracts.[106]

The Court of Justice has held that

Court of Justice held that health care was a "service" even though the government (rather than the service recipient) paid for the service.[110] National authorities could be justified in refusing to reimburse patients for medical services abroad if the health care received at home was without undue delay, and it followed "international medical science" on which treatments counted as normal and necessary.[111] The Court requires that the individual circumstances of a patient justify waiting lists, and this is also true in the context of the UK's National Health Service.[112] Aside from public services, another sensitive field of services are those classified as illegal. Josemans v Burgemeester van Maastricht held that the Netherlands' regulation of cannabis consumption, including the prohibitions by some municipalities on tourists (but not Dutch nationals) going to coffee shops,[113] fell outside article 56 altogether. The Court of Justice
reasoned that narcotic drugs were controlled in all member states, and so this differed from other cases where prostitution or other quasi-legal activity was subject to restriction.

If an activity does fall within article 56, a restriction can be justified under article 52 or over-riding requirements developed by the Court of Justice. In

a group of justifications were codified in article 16 that the case law has developed.

Digital Single Market

Diagram of the EU digital single market and the facilitation of public services across borders

In May 2015 the Juncker Commission[118] announced a plan to reverse the fragmentation of internet shopping and other online services by establishing a Single Digital Market that would cover digital services and goods from e-commerce to parcel delivery rates, uniform telecoms and copyright rules.[119]

People

The free movement of people means

EU citizens can move freely between member states for whatever reason (or without any reason) and may reside in any member state they choose if they are not an undue burden on the social welfare system or public safety in their chosen member state.[120] This required reduction of administrative formalities and greater recognition of professional qualifications of other states.[121] Fostering the free movement of people has been a major goal of European integration since the 1950s.[122]

Broadly defined, this freedom enables citizens of one Member State to travel to another, to reside and to work there (permanently or temporarily). The idea behind EU legislation in this field is that citizens from other member states should be treated equally to domestic citizens and should not be discriminated against.[citation needed]

The main provision on the freedom of movement of persons is Article 45 of the TFEU, which prohibits restrictions on the basis of nationality.[citation needed]

Free movement of workers

Since its foundation, the Treaties sought to enable people to pursue their life goals in any country through free movement.

social security.[128]
In practice, free movement has become politically contentious as nationalist political parties appear to have utilised concerns about immigrants taking jobs and benefits.

direct effect" to free movement, so a bank could not refuse employment to a worker who lacked a language certificate that could only be obtained in Bolzano.[129]

The

TFEU article 45(3) are "public policy, public security or public health",[139]
and there is also a general exception in article 45(4) for "employment in the public service".

For workers not citizens of the union but employed in one member state with a work permit, there is not the same freedom of movement within the Union. They need to apply for a new work permit if wanting to work in a different state. A facilitation mechanism for this process is the

Van Der Elst visa which gives easier rules should a non-EU worker already in one EU state need to be sent to another, for the same employer, because of a service contract that the employer made with a customer in that other state.[citation needed
]

Free movement of citizens

Beyond the right of free movement to work, the EU has increasingly sought to guarantee rights of citizens, and rights simply by being a

TFEU article 20, citizenship of the EU derives from nationality of a member state. Article 21 confers general rights to free movement in the EU and to reside freely within limits set by legislation. This applies for citizens and their immediate family members.[144]
This triggers four main groups of rights: (1) to enter, depart and return, without undue restrictions, (2) to reside, without becoming an unreasonable burden on social assistance, (3) to vote in local and European elections, and (4) the right to equal treatment with nationals of the host state, but for social assistance only after 3 months of residence.

The Berlin Wall (1961–1989) symbolised a bordered globe, where citizens of East Germany had no right to leave, and few could enter. The EU has progressively dismantled barriers to free movement, consistent with economic development.

First, article 4 of the

TFEU article 21. Second, article 6 allows every citizen to stay three months in another member state, whether economically active or not. Article 7 allows stays over three months with evidence of "sufficient resources... not to become a burden on the social assistance system". Articles 16 and 17 give a right to permanent residence after 5 years without conditions. Third, TEU article 10(3) requires the right to vote in the local constituencies for the European Parliament
wherever a citizen lives.

social security
and other assistance in EU member states. To ensure people contribute fairly to the communities they live in, there can be qualifying periods of residence and work up to five years.

Fourth, and more debated, article 24 requires that the longer an EU citizen stays in a host state, the more rights they have to access public and welfare services, on the basis of

Grzelczyk v Centre Public d’Aide Sociale d’Ottignes-Louvain-la-Neuve[148] a French student, who had lived in Belgium for three years, was entitled to receive the "minimex" income support for his fourth year of study. Similarly, in R (Bidar) v London Borough of Ealing the Court of Justice held that it was lawful to require a French UCL economics student to have lived in the UK for three years before receiving a student loan, but not that he had to have additional "settled status".[149] Similarly, in Commission v Austria, Austria was not entitled to restrict its university places to Austrian students to avoid "structural, staffing and financial problems" if (mainly German) foreign students applied, unless it proved there was an actual problem.[150] However, in Dano v Jobcenter Leipzig, the Court of Justice held that the German government was entitled to deny child support to a Romanian mother who had lived in Germany for 3 years, but had never worked. Because she lived in Germany for over 3 months, but under 5 years, she had to show evidence of "sufficient resources", since the Court reasoned the right to equal treatment in article 24 within that time depended on lawful residence under article 7.[151]

Schengen Area

Within the

EFTA members (Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland) have abolished physical barriers across the single market by eliminating border controls. In 2015, limited controls were temporarily re-imposed at some internal borders in response to the migrant crisis
.

Public sector procurement of goods and services

Public procurement legislation [152] and guidance based on "a set of basic standards for the award of public contracts which are derived directly from the rules and principles of the EC Treaty",[153] relating to the four freedoms, require equal treatment, non-discrimination, mutual recognition, proportionality and transparency to be maintained when purchasing goods and services for EU public sector bodies.

Integration of non-EU states

  Non-EU states that participate in the EU Single Market with exceptions: Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland (see also EFTA)
  Part of a former EU state that remains partially aligned to the EU Single Market on goods: Northern Ireland in the United Kingdom (see also Brexit and the Irish border)
  Non-EU states with a Stabilisation and Association Agreement with the EU allowing for participation in selected sectors of the Single Market[citation needed]: EU membership candidates Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Serbia; potential EU membership candidate: Kosovo
  Non-EU states with a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area agreement with the EU allowing for participation in selected sectors of the Single Market: Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine
  Non-EU states which have a bilateral Customs Union arrangement with the EU: Andorra, Monaco, San Marino, and Turkey

Only the EU member states are fully part of the European single market, while several other countries and territories have been granted various degrees of participation. The single market has been extended, with exceptions, to Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway through the agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA) and to Switzerland through sectoral bilateral and multilateral agreements. The exceptions, where these EFTA states are not bound by EU law, are:[154]

  • the common agricultural policy and the common fisheries policy (although the EEA agreement contains provisions on trade in agricultural and fishery produce);
  • the customs union;
  • the common trade policy;
  • the common foreign and security policy;
  • the field of justice and home affairs (although each EFTA country is part of the Schengen area); and
  • the economic and monetary union (EMU).

Switzerland

Switzerland, a member of EFTA but not of the EEA, participates in the single market with a number of exceptions, as defined by the Switzerland–European Union relations.[citation needed]

Western Balkans

Stabilisation and Association Agreement states have a "comprehensive framework in place to move closer to the EU and to prepare for [their] future participation in the Single Market".[155]

Turkey

Turkey has participated in the European Union–Turkey Customs Union since 1995, which enables it to participate in the free movement of goods (but not of agriculture or services, nor people) with the EU.[7]

Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine

Through the agreement of the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA), the three post-Soviet countries of Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine were given access to the "four freedoms" of the EU single market: free movement of goods, services, capital, and people. Movement of people however, is in form of visa free regime for short stay travel, while movement of workers remains within the remit of the EU Member States.[6] The DCFTA is an "example of the integration of a Non-EEA-Member into the EU Single Market".[156]

Northern Ireland

The

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland left the European Union at the end of January 2020 and left the single market in December 2020.[157] Under the terms of the Brexit withdrawal agreement, Northern Ireland remains aligned to the European single market in a limited way to maintain an open border on the island of Ireland, as governed by the Ireland/Northern Ireland protocol. This includes legislation on sanitary and phytosanitary standards for veterinary controls, rules on agricultural production/marketing, VAT and excise in respect of goods, and state aid rules.[158][159] It also introduces some controls on the flow of goods to Northern Ireland from Great Britain
.

Under the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement the Northern Ireland Assembly has the power by a simple majority to exit the protocol arrangements. In the event that consent is not given, the arrangements would cease to apply after two years. The Joint Committee would make alternative proposals to the UK and EU to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland.[160]

Further developments

Since 2015, the European Commission has been aiming to build a single market for energy.[161] and for the defence industry.[162]

On 2 May 2017, the European Commission announced a package of measures intended to enhance the functioning of the single market within the EU:[163]

  • a single digital gateway based on an upgraded Your Europe portal, offering enhanced access to information, assistance services and online procedures throughout the EU[164]
  • Single Market Information Tool (a proposed regulation under which the commission could require EU businesses to provide information in relation to the internal market and related areas where there is a suspicion that businesses are blocking the operation of the single market rules)[165]
  • SOLVIT Action Plan (aiming to reinforce and improve the functioning of the existing SOLVIT network).

New Hanseatic League

The New Hanseatic League is a political grouping of economically like-minded northern European states, established in February 2018, that is pushing for a more developed European single market, particularly in the services sector.[166]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ "Report for Selected Countries and Subjects". www.imf.org.
  2. ^ "General policy framework". Europa web portal. Retrieved 1 December 2014.
  3. ^ "The European Single Market". Europa web portal. Retrieved 28 May 2016.
  4. ^ "Internal Market". European Commission. Retrieved 17 June 2015.
  5. ^ Barnard, Catherine (2013). "Competence Review: The Internal Market" (PDF). Department for Business, Innovation and Skills. Archived (PDF) from the original on 22 September 2013. Retrieved 17 June 2015.
  6. ^ a b The EU-Ukraine Association Agreement and Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area What's it all about?. European External Action Service. Archived 13 December 2016 at the Wayback Machine.
  7. ^ a b "Decision No 1/95 of the EC-Turkey Association Council of 22 December 1995 on implementing the final phase of the Customs Union" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 19 March 2013.
  8. ^ "Brexit Agreement". EU Commission.
  9. ^ European Commission. "A Single Market for goods". Europa web portal. Archived from the original on 21 June 2007. Retrieved 27 June 2007.
  10. ^ Completing the Single Market, European Commission
  11. .
  12. . Retrieved 28 March 2017.
  13. ^ Barnes, John (20 January 2007). "Lord Cockfield". The Independent. Retrieved 28 March 2017.
  14. ^ "Completing The Internal Market". European Union. Retrieved 28 January 2020.
  15. ^ "EU glossary: Jargon S–Z". BBC News. 16 November 2010. Retrieved 17 June 2016.
  16. ^ "? – EUR-Lex". Retrieved 17 June 2016.
  17. ^ a b "Introduction – EU fact sheets – European Parliament". Retrieved 17 June 2016.
  18. ^ Directive 96/71/EC
  19. ^ Directive 2006/123/EC
  20. ^ "Justice policies at a glance – European Commission". Retrieved 17 June 2016.
  21. ^ The provision reads:

    3. The Union shall establish an internal market. It shall work for the sustainable development of Europe based on balanced economic growth and price stability, a highly competitive social market economy, aiming at full employment and social progress, and a high level of protection and improvement of the quality of the environment. It shall promote scientific and technological advance.

    — Treaty of Lisbon Article 3, point 3
  22. ^ a b Publications Office of the EU, Free movement of goods: Guide to the application of Treaty provisions governing the free movement of goods, page 9, © European Union, 2010. Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged, save where otherwise stated. Published 7 July 2010, accessed 3 January 2021
  23. ^ European Court of Justice, Sixth Chamber, Case C-97/98 Peter Jägerskiöld and Torolf Gustafsson on the interpretation of the rules of the EC Treaty on the free movement of goods and the freedom to provide services, 21 October 1999, accessed 3 January 2021
  24. ^ Official Journal of the European Communities, RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL AND OF THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE MEMBER STATES, MEETING WITHIN THE COUNCIL of 7 December 1998 on the free movement of goods,L337/10, accessed 1 January 2024
  25. ^ Case 27/67 Fink-Frucht
  26. ^ Case 7/68 Commission v Italy
  27. ^ Neither the purpose of the charge, nor its name in domestic law, is relevant.[26]
  28. ^ "? – EUR-Lex". Retrieved 17 June 2016.
  29. ^ "? – EUR-Lex". Retrieved 17 June 2016.
  30. ^ "? – EUR-Lex". Retrieved 17 June 2016.
  31. ^ "? – EUR-Lex". Retrieved 17 June 2016.
  32. ^ "? – EUR-Lex". Retrieved 17 June 2016.
  33. ^ Case 323/87 Commission v Italy (Taxation of rum), 1989 ECR 2275.
  34. P Craig
    and G de Búrca, EU Law: Text, Cases, and Materials (6th edn 2015) chs 18–19. C Barnard, The Substantive Law of the EU: The Four Freedoms (4th edn 2013) chs 2–6
  35. TFEU
    arts 28–30
  36. ^ (1974) Case 8/74, [1974] ECR 837
  37. TEEC
    article 30.
  38. ^ See D Chalmers et al, European Union Law (1st edn 2006) 662, "This is a ridiculously wide test."
  39. Commission v Ireland (1982) Case 249/81
  40. . See further K Muylle, 'Angry farmers and passive policemen' (1998) 23 European Law Review 467
  41. .
  42. ^ PreussenElektra AG v Schleswag AG (2001) C-379/98, [2001] ECR I-2099, [75]-[76]
  43. ^ "EUR-Lex - 61980CJ0053 - EN - EUR-Lex". eur-lex.europa.eu. Retrieved 11 April 2020.
  44. ^ (2003) C-112/00, [2003] ECR I-5659
  45. ^ (2003) C-112/00, [79]-[81]
  46. AG Maduro
    , [23]-[25]
  47. ^ (2003) C-112/00, [2003] ECR I-5659, [77]. See ECHR articles 10 and 11.
  48. ^ Oebel (1981) Case 155/80
  49. ^ Mickelsson and Roos (2009) C-142/05
  50. ^ Vereinigte Familiapresse v Heinrich Bauer (1997) C-368/95
  51. Dansk Supermarked A/S
    (1981) Case 58/80
  52. ^ See C Barnard, The Substantive Law of the EU: The Four Freedoms (4th edn 2013) 172–173, listing the present state.
  53. ^ (1979) Case 170/78
  54. TEEC
    article 30
  55. ^ (1979) Case 170/78, [13]-[14]
  56. ^ (1983) Case 261/81
  57. ^ (1983) Case 261/81, [17]
  58. ^ (2003) C-14/00, [88]-[89]
  59. ^ (2009) C-110/05, [2009] ECR I-519
  60. ^ (2009) C-110/05, [2009] ECR I-519, [56]. See also Mickelsson and Roos (2009) C-142/05, on prohibiting jet skis, but justified if proportionate towards the aim of safeguarding health and the environment.
  61. ^ (1993) C-267/91
  62. ^ See also Torfaen BC v B&Q plc (1989) C-145/88, holding the UK Sunday trading laws in the former Shops Act 1950 were probably outside the scope of article 34 (but not clearly reasoned). The "rules reflect certain political and economic choices" that "accord with national or regional socio-cultural characteristics."
  63. ^ cf Vereinigte Familiapresse v Heinrich Bauer (1997) C-368/95
  64. ^ (1997) C-34/95, [1997] ECR I-3843
  65. ^ (2001) C-405/98, [2001] ECR I-1795
  66. Unfair Commercial Practices Directive 2005/29/EC
  67. ^ Capital Movement Directive 1988 (88/361/EEC) Annex I, including (i) investment in companies, (ii) real estate, (iii) securities, (iv) collective investment funds, (v) money market securities, (vi) bonds, (vii) service credit, (viii) loans, (ix) sureties and guarantees (x) insurance rights, (xi) inheritance and personal loans, (xii) physical financial assets (xiii) other capital movements.
  68. ^ (2000) C-251/98, [22]
  69. Eurobond
    was unjustified discrimination. It was disproportionate in preserving, as Belgium argued, fiscal coherence or supervision.
  70. ^ See Commission v Netherlands (2006) C‑282/04, AG Maduro's Opinion on golden shares in KPN NV and TPG NV.
  71. ^ (2007) C-112/05
  72. ^ (2010) C-171/08
  73. TFEU art 345
  74. ^ "Regulation (EC) No 2560/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 2001 on cross-border payments in euro". EUR-lex – European Communities, Publications office, Official Journal L 344, 28 December 2001 P. 0013 – 0016. Retrieved 26 December 2008.
  75. ^ "Cross border payments in the EU, Euro Information, The Official Treasury Euro Resource". United Kingdom Treasury. Archived from the original on 1 December 2008. Retrieved 26 December 2008.
  76. ^ European Central Bank. "TARGET". Archived from the original on 23 October 2007. Retrieved 25 October 2007.
  77. ^ See Delors Report, Report on Economic and Monetary Union in the EC (1988)
  78. (2011) ch 9 and 349
  79. ^ Vértesy, László (2019). "The legal and regulatory aspects of the free movement of capital - towards the Capital Markets Union". Journal of Legal Theory HU (4): 110–128.
  80. ^ "Mid-term review of the capital markets union action plan". European Commission - European Commission. Retrieved 23 December 2019.
  81. ISSN 2053-4833
    .
  82. SSRN 2575654. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help
    )
  83. ^ See Asscher v Staatssecretaris van Financiën (1996) C-107/94, [1996] ECR I-3089, holding a director and sole shareholder of a company was not regarded as a "worker" with "a relationship of subordination".
  84. P Craig
    and G de Búrca, EU Law: Text, Cases, and Materials (6th edn 2015) ch 22. C Barnard, The Substantive Law of the EU: The Four Freedoms (4th edn 2013) chs 10–11 and 13
  85. ^ (1995) C-55/94, [1995] ECR I-4165
  86. Gebhard
    (1995) C-55/94, [37]
  87. TFEU
    art 54 treats natural and legal persons in the same way under this chapter.
  88. ITWF and Finnish Seamen's Union v Viking Line ABP and OÜ Viking Line Eesti
    (2007) C-438/05, [2007] I-10779, [34]
  89. ^ (1974) Case 2/74, [1974] ECR 631
  90. ^ See also Klopp (1984) Case 107/83, holding a Paris avocat requirement to have one office in Paris, though "indistinctly" applicable to everyone, was an unjustified restriction because the aim of keeping advisers in touch with clients and courts could be achieved by 'modern methods of transport and telecommunications' and without living in the locality.
  91. ^ (2011) C-565/08
  92. ^ (2011) C-565/08, [52]
  93. ^ Kamer van Koophandel en Fabrieken voor Amsterdam v Inspire Art Ltd (2003) C-167/01
  94. Employee Involvement Directive 2001/86/EC
  95. ^ (1988) Case 81/87, [1988] ECR 5483
  96. Überseering BV v Nordic Construction GmbH
    (2002) C-208/00, on Dutch minimum capital laws.
  97. Brandeis J
    and W Cary, 'Federalism and Corporate Law: Reflections on Delaware' (1974) 83(4) Yale Law Journal 663. See further S Deakin, 'Two Types of Regulatory Competition: Competitive Federalism versus Reflexive Harmonisation. A Law and Economics Perspective on Centros' (1999) 2 CYELS 231.
  98. ^ (2002) C-208/00, [92]-[93]
  99. ^ (2008) C-210/06
  100. ^ See further National Grid Indus (2011) C-371/10 (an exit tax for a Dutch company required justification, not justified here because it could be collected at the time of transfer) and VALE Epitesi (2012) C-378/10 (Hungary did not need to allow an Italian company to register)
  101. business law
    policies, have brought about other corporate law changes in Europe that were neither intended by the Court nor by policy-makers".
  102. TFEU
    arts 56 and 57
  103. ^ (1974) Case 33/74
  104. ^ cf Debauve (1980) Case 52/79, art 56 does not apply to 'wholly internal situations' where an activity are all in one member state.
  105. ^ ECJ First Chamber, Omalet NV v. Rijksdienst voor Sociale Zekerheid, Case C-245/09, 22 December 2010, see also case C-108/98 RI.SAN (1999) ECR I-5219 and Case C-97/98 Jagerskiold (1999) ECR I-7319
  106. ^ Council Directive 71/304/EEC of 26 July 1971 concerning the abolition of restrictions on the freedom to provide services in respect of public works contracts and on the award of public works contracts to contractors acting through agencies or branches.
  107. ^ Belgium v Humbel (1988) Case 263/86, but contrast Schwarz and Gootjes-Schwarz v Finanzamt Bergisch Gladbach (2007) C-76/05
  108. ^ Wirth v Landeshauptstadt Hannover (1993) C-109/92
  109. ^ (2001) C-157/99, [2001] ECR I-5473
  110. ^ (2001) C-157/99, [48]-[55]
  111. ^ (2001) C-157/99, [94] and [104]-[106]
  112. ^ See Watts v Bedford Primary Care Trust (2006) C-372/04 and Commission v Spain (2010) C-211/08
  113. ^ (2010) C‑137/09, [2010] I-13019
  114. ^ (1995) C-384/93, [1995] ECR I-1141
  115. ^ (2004) C-36/02, [2004] ECR I-9609
  116. ^ (2009) C‑42/07, [2007] ECR I-7633
  117. ^ 2006/123/EC
  118. ^ "Digital Single Market". Retrieved 17 June 2016.
  119. ^ Ian Traynor. EU unveils plans to set up digital single market for online firms. The Guardian. 6 May 2015.
  120. ^ "Free movement of persons | Fact Sheets on the European Union | European Parliament". Retrieved 2 July 2018.
  121. ^ European Commission. "Living and working in the Single Market". Europa web portal. Archived from the original on 13 June 2007. Retrieved 27 June 2007.
  122. .
  123. P Craig
    and G de Búrca, EU Law: Text, Cases, and Materials (6th edn 2015) ch 21. C Barnard, The Substantive Law of the EU: The Four Freedoms (4th edn 2013) chs 8–9 and 12–13
  124. P Craig
    and G de Burca, European Union Law (2003) 701, there is a tension 'between the image of the Community worker as a mobile unit of production, contributing to the creation of a single market and to the economic prosperity of Europe' and the 'image of the worker as a human being, exercising a personal right to live in another state and to take up employment there without discrimination, to improve the standard of living of his or her family'.
  125. ^ Defrenne v Sabena (No 2) (1976) Case 43/75, [10]
  126. ^ Lawrie-Blum v Land Baden-Württemberg (1986) Case 66/85, [1986] ECR 2121
  127. ^ (1988) Case 196/87, [1988] ECR 6159
  128. ^ Dano v Jobcenter Leipzig (2014) C‑333/13
  129. ^ Angonese v Cassa di Risparmio di Bolzano SpA (2000) C-281/98, [2000] ECR I-4139
  130. Free Movement of Workers Regulation 492/2011
    arts 1–4
  131. ^ (1995) C-415/93
  132. ^ (1989) Case 379/87, [1989] ECR 3967
  133. ^ (2000) C-281/98, [2000] ECR I-4139, [36]-[44]
  134. ^ (1995) C-279/93
  135. ^ (2004) C-387/01, [54]-[55]
  136. ^ (2007) C-287/05, [55]
  137. ^ (2007) C-213/05
  138. ^ Hartmann v Freistaat Bayern (2007) C-212/05. Discussed in C Barnard, The Substantive Law of the European Union (2013) ch 9, 293–294
  139. ^ See Van Duyn v Home Office Case 41/74, [1974] ECR 1337
  140. ^ See NN Shuibhne, 'The Resilience of EU Market Citizenship' (2010) 47 CMLR 1597 and HP Ipsen, Europäisches Gemeinschaftsrecht (1972) on the concept of a 'market citizen' (Marktbürger).
  141. Grzelczyk v Centre Public d’Aide Sociale d’Ottignes-Louvain-la-Neuve (2001) C-184/99
    , [2001] ECR I-6193
  142. JHH Weiler, 'The European Union belongs to its citizens: Three immodest proposals' (1997) 22 European Law Review 150
  143. ^ 5th Report on Citizenship of the Union COM(2008) 85. The "First Annual Report on Migration and Integration" COM(2004) 508, found by 2004, 18.5m third country nationals were resident in the EU.
  144. CRD 2004 art 2(2) defines 'family member' as a spouse, long term partner, descendant under 21 or depednant elderly relative that is accompanying the citizen. See also Metock v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (2008) C-127/08, holding that four asylum seekers from outside the EU, although they did not lawfully enter Ireland (because their asylum claims were ultimately rejected) were entitled to remain because they had lawfully married EU citizens. See also, R (Secretary of State for the Home Department) v Immigration Appeal Tribunal and Surinder Singh
    [1992] 3 CMLR 358
  145. Communist Manifesto
  146. ^ (1998) C-85/96, [1998] ECR I-2691
  147. ^ (2004) C-456/02, [2004] ECR I-07573
  148. ^ (2001) C-184/99, [2001] ECR I-6193
  149. ^ (2005) C-209/03, [2005] ECR I-2119
  150. ^ (2005) C-147/03
  151. ^ (2014) C‑333/13
  152. ^ European Commission, Legal rules and implementation. Retrieved 16 May 2017
  153. ^ European Commission, Commission Interpretative Communication on the Community law applicable to contract awards not or not fully subject to the provisions of the Public Procurement Directives, published 1 August 2006, accessed 1 June 2021
  154. ^ "Introduction – Fact sheets on the European Union – At your service". European Parliament. Retrieved 15 April 2018.
  155. ^ EU and Serbia: enhanced cooperation rules enter into force. European Commission Press Release Databease. Published on 31 August 2013.
  156. ^ EU-Ukraine Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area. European External Action Service. Archived 1 December 2017 at the Wayback Machine.
  157. ^ Edgington, Tom (2 March 2020). "Which countries does the UK do the most trade with?". BBC News.
  158. ^ "Questions & Answers: EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement". European Commission. 24 December 2020. Retrieved 30 December 2020.
  159. ^ "Brexit Agreement". EU Commission.
  160. ^ "Northern Ireland Protocol". Institute For Government. 19 December 2019.
  161. . Retrieved 27 August 2018.
  162. ^ "EU to support common defense market, boost joint spending". Deutsche Welle. 30 November 2016. Retrieved 15 April 2018.
  163. Europa (Press release). Brussels: European Commission
    . 2 May 2017. Retrieved 27 August 2018.
  164. . 2 October 2018. Retrieved 29 May 2019.
  165. . 2 May 2017. Retrieved 16 May 2017.
  166. ^ "The EU's new Hanseatic League picks its next Brussels battle". Financial Times. October 2018. Archived from the original on 11 December 2022. Retrieved 11 October 2018.

References

Books
Articles

External links