Self-Control Exercises on Quantitative Restrictions

iDevice icon Fill in the blanks!
Read the paragraph below and fill in the missing words.

Article 34 TFEU prohibits quantitative restrictions on imports and all measures having equivalent effect between Member States, whereas Article 35 TFEU prohibits restrictions on , and all measures having equivalent effect between Member States. While Article 34 prohibits both distinctly and indistinctly applicable measures, Article 35 prohibits only applicable measures, although since 2008 (case C-205/07, Gysbrechts) the CJEU has reduced the latter difference. In case 2/73, Geddo, the ECJ defined quantitative restrictions (QRs) as "measures which amount to a total or restraint of, according to the circumstances, imports, exports or goods in transit". Since the Joined Cases C-267 and 268/91, Keck and Mithouard, the ECJ distinguishes between product-related rules and arrangements. In the Joined Cases C-110/05, Commission vs. Italy (Towing Trailers), the ECJ explained that measures of equivalent effect (MEEs) under Article 34 TFEU include "Any other measure which access to products originating in other Member States to the market of a Member State." Such MEEs include the rules on the shape, content, packaging, and labelling of - they all may hinder inter-state , but cannot be described as QRs. Article 36 TFEU provides an list of derogations from free movement of goods: public , public or public ; the protection of health and life of humans, animals or ; the protection of national treasures possessing artistic, historic or value; or the protection of and commercial property. To this list applies the second sentence of Article 36 that says that such derogations may not constitute a means of or a disguised restriction on trade between Member States. The list in Article 36 has been copied from Article XX of the 1950s GATT and is outdated. Therefore, case Cassis de Dijon started to bring additional list of justifications, known as mandatory requirements, into free movement of goods law. "Mandatory requirements" are also known as "public requirements" and those requirements include: the effectiveness of fiscal supervision; the protection of public health; the fairness of transactions; the defence of the consumer; of the environment; protection of working conditions; protection of cinema as a form of expression; protection of national or regional socio-cultural characteristics; maintenance of press and in a similar vein, the protection of books as cultural objects; preventing the risk of seriously undermining the financial balance of the social system; protection of fundamental ; preserving the maintenance of order in society; road ; protection of children; protection of animal ; the against crime.

  

Multi-select
1. The case law of the CJEU on restrictions on imports has been more extensive than the case law of the CJEU on restrictions on exports. The reason is:
Member States import more than they export.
Import is more controversial than export.
Member States are unlikely to create barriers to exports, because the opposite would be expensive.
Member States have an interest in encouraging exports.



2. Can Article 34 TFEU have in addition to vertical direct effect also horizontal direct effect?
Yes it can, because State responsibility does not exclude horizontal direct effect.
No, direct horizontal effect is impossible, because Article 34 is addressed to Member States.
No, it cannot, because only States may be held responsible for breach of Article 34.
Who cares!



3. The aim of Directive 98/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations (1998, OJ L 204 p. 37) is:
to require Member States to notify the Commission of any draft technical regulations before they are adopted and before they create barriers to trade so that they can be checked for their compatibility with EU law.
to inform the Commission why any technical regulations are needed.
to notify the Commission of the use of any draft technical regulations.
to enable other Member States to comment (via Commission) on the draft technical requirements of a Member State.



4. The aim of Directive 2005/29 on unfair commercial practices (2005, OJ L 149 p. 22) is:
to favour the traders' entrepreneurial freedom.
to prohibit unfair commercial practices.
to set out the rules as to when commercial practices are unfair.
being a maximum harmonization measure.



5. The aim of the Mutual Recognition Regulation 764/2008 is:
to replace the process of notifying the Commission with a dialogue between the national authorities of the host State and the economic operator.
to regulate the situations where the host State has taken or intends to take a decision prohibiting the placing of a product on the market.
to regulate the situations where the host State has taken or intends to take a decision requiring the product's modification or additional testing.
to regulate the situations where the host State has taken or intends to take a decision requiring the product to be withdrawn from the market.



« Previous | Next »