Front | Back |
Schul 1982
|
Gave the purpose of the internal market:
'the elimination of all obstacles to intra comm trade...merge the national markets into single market...' |
Commission v Italy (Italian Art Case) 1968
|
Gave definition of 'goods':
"By goods...there must be understood products which can be valued in money and which are capable, as such, of forming the subject of commercial transactions" |
Jagerskiold 1999
|
Goods are generally things you can touch:
They 'possess tangible physical characteristics' Obvious Example: Comm v P'ment & Council Tabacco Ad) Not so obvious eg: Campus Oil 1984 |
Donckelworke 1976
|
Article 29 TFEU
"...as regards free circulation of goods within the Community, products entitled to 'free circulation' are definitively and wholly assimilated to products originating in Member States". |
Van Gend en Loos (1963)
|
Postal company charged tariff on importing chemicals. contested it, paid it but then took it to court and relied on Art 30 which prohibits CDs and CEEs. Held that they were allowed to rely upon it, landmark case because it gave rise to the direct effect principle which states individuals can rely on the EU law to do with fiscal barriers to trade.
|
Commission v Italy ( Statistical Levy Case)
|
Gave definition of CEE
“Any 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 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 the domestic product”. |
Gingerbread Case & Diamantarbeiters
|
Article 30 catches both protectionist and non-protectionist charges
|
A v Ville de Seraing 2006
|
The requirement that the charge must be imposed on goods by reason of the fact that they cross a frontier - the charging even must be the importation/ exportation of goods from/to another Member State. Art 30 applies to charges levied at the frontier.
|
Comm v Germany 1988
|
The Court
recognised that a charge can be lawful in 3 circumstances: (a) If it constitutes payment for genuine administrative services rendered to the importer/exporter, of a sum in proportion to the service (“fees for services”) (b) If it constitutes payment for inspections required by EU law (“fees for inspections”) (c) 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. In other words, if it falls within the scope of Article 110 TFEU (“internal taxation”) |
Comm v Germany 1988
|
Fees for services:
The payment must be consideration for a genuine service of direct effect to the importer or exporter-must not be consideration for a service which benefits the public as a whole |
Commission v Belgium (warehousing) 1983
|
The Court noted that Article 30 TFEU will not apply if the national court considers that “the charge in question is the consideration for a service actually rendered to the
importer and is of an amount commensurate with that service”. |
Bauhuis v Netherlands 1977
|
Fees for inspection:
Where EU legislation requires an inspection to be undertaken by a State, the national authorities can impose a charge in order to cover the costs of that mandatory inspection |
Comm v Belgium 1984
|
Where EU legislation permits an inspection to be undertaken by a State, the
national authorities cannot recover any fees charged from the traders |
Conditions that must be satisfied so that inspection fees do not constitute a CEE:
Commission v. Germany, [1988] |
(a) they do not exceed the actual costs of the inspections in connection with
which they are charged (b) the inspections in question are obligatory and uniform for all the products concerned in the EU (c) they are prescribed by EU law in the general interest of the EU (d) they promote the free movement of goods, in particular by neutralising obstacles which could arise from unilateral measures of inspection adopted in accordance with Article 36 TFEU |
Will a charge that represents the levying of what is genuinely internal taxation constitute a charge having an equivalent effect?
|
Internal Taxation
It will not. Kapniki 2000: “It is settled case law that the essential feature of a charge having equivalent effect to a customs duty which distinguishes it from an internal tax is that the former is borne solely by a product which crosses a frontier as such, whilst the latter is borne by imported and domestic products”. |