Case C-112/00, Schmidberger
C-112/00, Schmidberger,
judgment of 12 June 2003 ECR 2003 p. I-5659 http://curia.europa.eu/jurisp/cgi-bin/form.pl?lang=en&Submit=Rechercher&alldocs=alldocs&docj=docj&docop=docop&docor=docor&docjo=docjo&numaff=C-112/00&datefs=&datefe=&nomusuel=&domaine=&mots=&resmax=100
Identified should be:
● The parties of the case
● The subject of the case
-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?
● Link to human rights in the case
● Importance of the case
against the background of human rights’ protection
Think about the article written by C. Kombos (2010) „The Esoteric Dimension of Constitutional Pluralism: EU’s Internal Constitutional Sub-units and the Non-symbolic Cumulative Constitution“ in P. J. Birkinshaw, M. Varney (eds.) The European Union Legal Order after Lisbon. Austin, Boston, Chicago, New York, The Netherlands: Kluwer, 291. In the light of the article, what were the values weighed by the CJEU? What is superior - a fundamental right with its roots in the ECHR, or a fundamental freedom of the EU? Can a restriction of a fundamental freedom of the EU be justified by a fundamental right? Vice versa - can a restriction of a fundamental right be justified by a fundamental freedom of the EU?