Overzicht studiestof European Union Law - Free Movement of Goods - Regulatory Barriers

7 important questions on Overzicht studiestof European Union Law - Free Movement of Goods - Regulatory Barriers

Art. 34 covers MEEQR. Name the four periods can be identified that mark the evolution of the concept of MEEQRS.

The four periods that shaped the concept of MEEQR are:
1. Dassonville: Trading Rules
2. Cassis: Product requirements
3. Keck: Selling Arrangements (and Familliappress)
4. Italian Trailers: Consumer Restrictions (and Mickelsson).

What does the Court decided in Cassis de Dijon regarding product requirements?

Trade restrictions that result from the disparities between equally applicable measures such as product requirements are prohibited under Art. 34.

The Court also created justifications, which is called 'Imperative Requirements'

What does the Court decided regarding selling arrangements?

Selling arrangements is not a MEEQR if:
1. It applies equally to all traders operating in the market of the Member State
2. It affects in the same way in law and in fact the marketing of domestic and imported goods.
3. It does not restrict access of imported products in the market.
  • Higher grades + faster learning
  • Never study anything twice
  • 100% sure, 100% understanding
Discover Study Smart

How can we distinguish between selling arrangements and product requirements?

If the product needs to be changed, it is called a product requirement. While if there is no change needed in the product itself, but a condition how the products needs to be sold, it is a selling arrangement. This is clarified in Familliapress.

Is a prohibition on the use of a product constituted an MEEQR?

In the Italian-trailer case the Court answered this positively. A prohibition on the use of a product in the territory of a Member State has a considerable influence on the behaviour of consumeres, which, affects the access of that product to the market of that Member State. Such prohibition constitutes a MEEQR, unless it can be justified objectively.

Does consumer restrictions needs to be discriminative in effect to be constituted as an MEEQR?

In the Mickelsson case, the Court stated that this is not needed. Tje mational measure would negatively influence consumers and thus hinder acces to the domestic market of foreign products and by limiting market access, these rules violate Art. 34.

What is the imperative requirement stated in Cassis?

The imperative requirement is the implied justifications of Art. 34 TFEU, when:
It is recognized as being necessary in order to satisfy mandatory requirements relating in particular to the effectiveness of fiscal supervision, protection of public healt, fairness of commercial transactions and the defence of the consumer.

The question on the page originate from the summary of the following study material:

  • A unique study and practice tool
  • Never study anything twice again
  • Get the grades you hope for
  • 100% sure, 100% understanding
Remember faster, study better. Scientifically proven.
Trustpilot Logo