Case Cassis de Dijon
Identified should be:
●
The parties of the case
●
The subject of the case
●
The structure of Free Movement cases:
-Element
of EU law
-Does
the case fall under EU free movement law?
-Which
free movement rights are restricted?
-Is
the restriction distinctive or indistinctive / discriminatory or
non-discriminatory?
-Is
the restriction justified? (In this case, it is important that there exist two
groups of justifications - treaty-based and case law
based.)
-Is
the restriction necessary in a democratic society?
-Is
the restriction proportionate?
● What did the ECJ decide?
Please note:
It is established by the case-law beginning with
Cassis de Dijon that, in the absence of harmonization of legislation, obstacles
to free movement of goods which are the consequence of applying, to goods
coming from other Member States where they are lawfully manufactured and
marketed, rules that lay down requirements to be met by such goods (such as
those relating to designation, form, size, weight, composition, presentation,
labelling, packaging) constitute measures of equivalent effect prohibited by
Article 34 (30 EC). This is so even if those rules apply without distinction to
all products unless their application can be justified by a public-interest
objective taking precedence over the free movement of goods.
The Cassis-judgment also says that:
Obstacles to movement within the Community resulting from disparities between the national laws relating to the marketing of the products in question must be accepted in so far as those provisions may be recognized as being necessary in order to satisfy mandatory requirements relating in particular to the effectiveness of fiscal supervision , the protection of public health , the fairness of commercial transactions and the defence of the consumer. (para. 8)
(For the notes, the following material has been used: Imola Streho, Free Movement of Goods: About Discrimination, Restrictions and Market Access. Advanced European Union Legal Practice. Reader - Teaching Material (Total Law CEU Sun, Department of Legal Studies, 2010))