Term
| What article articulates the four essential characteristics of the internal market? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| What are the four essential characteristics of the internal market, as articulated in Article 26(2)? |
|
Definition
Free movement of:
1) Goods
2) Persons
3) Services
4) Capital |
|
|
Term
| The free movement of goods is identified as on of the cornerstones of the EU. In which Article is it's pursuit articulated? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| In what case is the broad definition of 'goods', which will be used on this course, articulated? |
|
Definition
Commission v Italy (The Italian Art case)
(Italy tried to claim that pieces of artistic heritage were not 'goods') |
|
|
Term
| In Commission v Italy (The Italian Art case), how are 'goods' defined? |
|
Definition
| CJ held that goods are products which can be valued in money and which are capable, as such, of forming the subject of commercial transactions. |
|
|
Term
| What is the rationale for establishing free movement of goods? |
|
Definition
| Free movement of goods is necessary for the achievement of a customs union, which is regarded by economists as an essential step for the integration of markets |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
An agreement between countries to abide by two principles:
a) a free trade area where goods pass between the countries without the imposition of restrictions such as customs duties
b)a syste, for the charging of common customs tariff on goods coming into the free trade area from other countries |
|
|
Term
| What is the internal aspect of a customs union? |
|
Definition
| The internal aspect is the agreement to have a free trade area, where goods pass between countries without the imposition of restrictions such as customs duties |
|
|
Term
| What is the external aspect of a customs union? |
|
Definition
| The agreement to have a system for charging a common customs tariff on goods coming in to the free trade area from other countries. |
|
|
Term
| Which article contemplates that internal and external customs union within the EU? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| Which element of the customs union will not be referred to in exeminations? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| The general provision in Art 28(1), which establishes the pursuit of a customs union, is supplemented by more specific provisions which regulate the customs union. Which articles set out the specific provisions? |
|
Definition
1) Article 30 TFEU - prohibits custom duties and CEEs
2) Article 110 TFEU - prohibits discriminatory taxation
3) Articles 34 & 35 - prohibits quantitive restrictions and MEEs
4) Article 36 - ougtlines permissible derogations from Articles 34&35 |
|
|
Term
| What does Article 30 TFEU provide for? |
|
Definition
| Prohibition of customs duties and charges having equivalent effect |
|
|
Term
| What does Article 110 TFEU provide for? |
|
Definition
| Prohibition of discriminatory taxation |
|
|
Term
| What does Article 34 provide for? |
|
Definition
| Prohibition of quantitive restrictions and all measures having equivalent effect |
|
|
Term
| What does Article 35 provide for? |
|
Definition
| Prohibition of quantitive restrictions and all measures having equivalent effect |
|
|
Term
| What does Article 36 provide for? |
|
Definition
| Derogations from Articles 34 & 35 |
|
|
Term
| What is the key difference between Article 30 and Article 110 TFEU |
|
Definition
| Article 30 prohibits charges that are levied simply because goods have crossed the frontier of the state. Article 110 regulates charges that are levied as a system of internal taxation within the state. |
|
|
Term
| Articles 30 and 110 are both of a pecuniary nature. What does this mean? |
|
Definition
| Pecuniary = of or consisting of money. |
|
|
Term
| Is article 30 directly effective? |
|
Definition
| Yes - this was confirmed in the case of van Gend en Loos |
|
|
Term
| In what case was it confirmed that Article 30 is directly effective? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| A charge (however small) specifying the rate of duty to be paid by the importer to the state, solely for the reason that the goods are being imported into that state |
|
|
Term
| What effect do customs duties have? |
|
Definition
| They have the effect of making imported goods more expensive relative to domestic goods |
|
|
Term
| Why do customs duties represent a barrier to free trade? |
|
Definition
| As they make imported goods more expensive than domestic goods |
|
|
Term
| Does the purpose of a customs duty affect it's legality? |
|
Definition
| NO - the purpose is irrelevant, the effect is the important bit. |
|
|
Term
| Commission v Italy - The Italian Art case |
|
Definition
EXPORT DUTIES ARE ALSO CUSTOMS DUTIES, WHICH ARE PRHIBITED UNDER ARTICLE 30 TFEU
THE PURPOSE OF THE CHARGE IS IRRELEVANT, THE EFFECT IS IMPORTANT
Italy imposed a tax on exporting artistic heritage, the purpose was to prevent exportation and retain artistic heritage, NOT to raise revenues
Despite this, it was held that the imposition of the export tax was illegal |
|
|
Term
| What is the purpose of also prohibiting 'charges having equivalent effect' in Article 30 TFEU? |
|
Definition
As a nation could simply 'disguise' a customs duty as a CEE - which would then undermine the prohibition on customs duties
CEE's have an equivalent effect to customs duties
If it were possible for countries to impose charges on imported goods that are not strictly classifiable as customs duties, but which achieve the same effect, the prohibition on customs duties would simply be illusory |
|
|
Term
| In what case was the most comprehensive definition of CEEs enunciated? |
|
Definition
| Commission v Italy (The Statistical Levy case) |
|
|
Term
| Commission v Italy (The statistical Levy case) |
|
Definition
PROVIDED A COMPREHENSIVE DEFINITION OF CEES
Italian govt imposed a small levy on goods exported to other MSs, claiming that the levy was imposed for the purpose of collecting statistical data for use in the analysis of trade patterns, which was argued to be of benefit to the traders. |
|
|
Term
| The Statistical Levy case's definition of CEEs |
|
Definition
a) any pecuniary charge, however small
b) whatever its designation and mode of application
c) imposed unilaterally on domestic or foreign goods
d) by reason of the fact that they crossed a frontier
e) NOT a customs duty in the strict sense
= CHARGE HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT
EVEN IF...
1) it is not imposed for the benefit of the State
2) it is not discriminatory in effect
3) it is not protective in effect
4) the product on which the charge is imposed is not in competition with any domestic product |
|
|
Term
| Are there any possible defences to imposing a CEE? |
|
Definition
NO - as Article 30 = an absolute prohibition of customs duties and CEEs.
HOWEVER, there are 3 circumstances in which a charge on imports will not constitute a customs duty or a CEE - see COMMISSION V GERMANY |
|
|
Term
| Does a CEE have to be levied at the border in order for it to be a CEE? |
|
Definition
| NO - the charge need not be levied at the border, so long as it is levied by reason of crossing the border. |
|
|
Term
| Would a teeny-weeny charge, which is imposed as a consequence of crossing the border still count as a CEE and thus fall foul of Article 30 TFEU? |
|
Definition
| YES - CEE = pecuniary charge, however small |
|
|
Term
| The definition of CEE, as provided in 'the statistical levy case' refers to a charge being a CEE 'regardless of its designation and mode of application'. What does this mean? |
|
Definition
| Regardless of the label which is attached to the charge, and regardless of the way in which it is applied (e.g. does not need to be levied at the border) |
|
|
Term
| Which case is used as an example of how a CEE will still be a CEE, even if it is not protectionist? |
|
Definition
| Saciaal Fonds voor de Dimantarbeiders v Chougol Diamond Co |
|
|
Term
| Saciaal Fonds voor de Dimantarbeiders v Chougol Diamond Co |
|
Definition
EVEN IF A CEE IS NOT-PROTECTIONIST, IT IS STILL A PROHIBITED CEE
Belgian state introduced a charge on diamonds imported into Belgium
Clearly not a protectionist charge, as Belgium does not produce diamonds
Purpose of the charge was to fund additional social security benefits for Belgian diamond workers
CJ confirmed that customs duties and CEEs are prohibited regardless of the purpose for which they were introduced
What is important = the effect of the charge... and in this instance, the effect of the charge was to make imported diamonds less competitive |
|
|
Term
| How do you identify a CEE? |
|
Definition
| A charge issued because the state border has been crossed, which has the effect of making the charged product less competitive |
|
|
Term
| Which case sets out the instances in which a charge on imports will not constitute a customs duty or CEE? |
|
Definition
| Commission v Germany [1988] |
|
|
Term
| Commission v Germany [1988] |
|
Definition
There are three instances in which a charge on imports will not constitute a customs duty or a CEE:
1) If the charge relates to a general system of internal dues applied systematically and in accordance with the same criteria to domestic and imported goods alike
2) If the charge constitutes payment for a service in fact rendered to the economic operator of a sum in proportion to the service
3) If the charge attaches to inspections carried out to fulfil obligations imposed by community law |
|
|
Term
| According to Commission v Germany [1988], what are the three circumstances in which a state can impost a charge upon crossing the border? |
|
Definition
1) If the charge relates to a general system of internal dues, which is systematically applied to domestic and imported goods alike.
2) If the charge constitutes payment for services rendered to the importer, and the amount is commensurate with the cost of the service
3) If the charge attaches to inspections which the state is required to carry out in order to fulfill EU obligations |
|
|
Term
| If the first of the Commission v Germany criteria applies (internal dues), under which article will the 'charge' be considered? |
|
Definition
| Under Article 110, as it will be in the nature of an internal tax, rather than a charge which is dependent upon the product crossing a frontier. |
|
|
Term
| Dansk Denkavit ApS v Danish Ministry of Agriculture |
|
Definition
AN INTERNAL DUE MUST BE APPLIED SYSTEMATICALLY TO DOMESTIC AND IMPORTED GOODS ALIKE
CJ held that a charge levied to fund the cost of checking imported samles of foodstuffs for quality, which was imposed using the same criteria as applied to domestic products, was not a CEE, but part of an internal system of dues covered by Article 110 |
|
|
Term
| Bresciani v Amministrazione Italiana delle Finanze |
|
Definition
AN INTERNAL DUE MUST BE APPLIED SYSTEMATICALLY TO DOMESTIC AND IMPORTED GOODS ALIKE
Italian state imposed public health inspections on domestic and imported cowhides, which were paid for via a tax. However, the tax levied on domestic and imported goods had different criteria, therefore CJ ruled that it did not = an internal due |
|
|
Term
| If a charge is to fall under the second category of Commission v Germany circumstances, what must it do/be for? |
|
Definition
| It must be payment for services rendered. The charge must be proportionate consideration for a genuine service that is of direct benefit to the importer or exporter. |
|
|
Term
| Why did the charge in Commission v Italy (The Statistical Levy Charge case) fail to be identified as peyment for services rendered? |
|
Definition
| Italian government argued that the levy was to pay for the collection of statistical data. However, the CJ held that any benefit was too general and difficult to assess. Therefore, it could not be regarded as benefiting importers/exporters, and was instead held to be a CEE |
|
|
Term
| Why was the charge issued in Bresciani NOT held to fall within the second criteria of the Commission v Germany case (Payment for services rendered? |
|
Definition
| State charged for veterinary health inspections to be carried out on raw cowhides. CJ held that these inspections were in the public interest, rather than a service directly benefiting the importer. Therefore it was held to be a CEE |
|
|
Term
| In Bresciani, the Italian government argued that the charges levied on raw cowhide importers should be considered as a tax, because domestic hides were also inspected and charged a similar fee. Why did the CJ refuse to recognise the charge as a tax? |
|
Definition
| Because the inspections for importers were for a slightly different purpose than the ones for domestic producers, therefore not according to the same criteria or at the same stage of production. Therefore, the charges could not be a tax. |
|
|
Term
| If in Bresciani the CJ had accepted the Italian government's argument that the charge on cowhide importers was a tax, under what article would the charge have been assessed? |
|
Definition
| Article 110 TFEU - article which deals with prohibition of discriminatory taxation |
|
|
Term
| In Commission v Belgium, why did the CJ refuse to identify the charge for warehouse rental as a payment for services rendered? |
|
Definition
| Belgium was making importers store their items in warehouses whilst the items went through customs clearance. Belgium was charging importers to use the warehouse. CJ held that a charge is a CEE where importers are forced to pay warehouse charges for storing their goods, where they are having to store their goods solely for the purpose of customs formalities. |
|
|
Term
| In the case of Commission v Belgium, the CJ laid down that the charge in question will not be considered a CEE if three conditions are satisfied. What are these conditions? |
|
Definition
1) The charge is consideration for services rendered
2) It is of benefit to the importer
3) The amount charged is commensurate with the costs of the service provided |
|
|
Term
| Commission v Belgium (The warehouses case) - 3 stage test for establishing a 'payment for services rendered'. |
|
Definition
1) The charge is consideration for services rendered
2) It is of benefit to the importer
3) The amount charged is commensurate with the costs of the service provided |
|
|
Term
| What is the leading authority on whether the cost of inspections on products escapes the scope of the Article 30 prohibition on customs duties and CEEs |
|
Definition
| Commission v Germany (The veterinary inspections case) |
|
|
Term
| Commission v Germany (The veterinary inspections case) |
|
Definition
RELATED TO CHARGES FOR INSPECTIONS REQUIRED BY EU LAW
German government charged a fee to cover the costs of veterinary inspections on imported live animals
The inspections were required by a directive regulating the protection of animals during international transport
The CJ held that this inspection fee was NOT a CEE, and set out four requirements for such a charge to not be regarded as a CEE |
|
|
Term
| Commission v Germany (The veterinary inspections case) - CJ set out four requirements that need to be fulfilled in order for an inspection charge not to consitute a CEE. What are they? |
|
Definition
1) The charge must not exceed the actual costs of the inspections
2) The inspections must be obigitory and uniform for all the relevant products in the union
3) The inspections must be prescribed by EU law in the general interest of the Union
4) The inspections must promote the free movement of goods, in particular by neutralising obstacles that could have arisen from unilateral inspection measures |
|
|
Term
| Commission v Germany (The veterinary inspections case) - CJ set out four requirements that need to be fulfilled in order for an inspection charge not to consitute a CEE. What are they? |
|
Definition
1) The charge must not exceed the actual costs of the inspections
2) The inspections must be obigitory and uniform for all the relevant products in the union
3) The inspections must be prescribed by EU law in the general interest of the Union
4) The inspections must promote the free movement of goods, in particular by neutralising obstacles that could have arisen from unilateral inspection measures |
|
|
Term
| An inspection charge levied on an importer/exporter is exempt from being a CEE if it meets the criteria laid out in Commission v germany (The cowhide case). Which case confirms that the costs associated with inspections required by international conventions can also be exempt from Article 30 prohibition? |
|
Definition
| Commission v Netherlands 1977 |
|
|
Term
| How can the decisions of the CJ in Bresciani and Commission v Germany (The veterinary inspections case)on inspections as CEEs be reconciled? |
|
Definition
| In Bresciani, the inspection being carried out was not required under EU/international law. Whereas the inspections being carried out in Commission v Germany WERE obligatory under EU law |
|
|
Term
| Commission v Netherlands [1977] |
|
Definition
| The costs associated with carrying out obligatory international inspections will not be considered as a CEE/Customs duty. |
|
|
