Free movement of goods Flashcards
firstly start off with which article?
Article 28 TFEU states that there is a prohibition of imports and exports on customs duties and the common customs tariff with related third countries
what does article 30 tell us?
if there is a customs duty which is disguised as a tex then this also prohibited.
we must establish goods therefore what are they? we were told this in Commission v Italy 7/68
tried to stop the export of cultural property. the method cannot be customs duties to prevent the export of goods. therefore if something is a good it means that there can be no tariffs. it is the equivalent of a customs duty
goods are those which are valued in money and are capable of forming commercial transactions.
what did the case of commission v Italy show? 24/68
no matter the reason, as long is it is goods which cross the boarder and there is a charge placed on them it will be a charge having equivalent effect to a customs duty.
Sociaal Fonds
Belgium created a charge on imports of diamonds
purely selfless charge where they did not stand to benefit from it. still a form of customs duty as seen in article 30.
commission v italy permissable charges 24/68
used a levey on imports and exports with a view to collect statistics for traders. found that it was too general so it was unlawful. Therefore charges which the benefit is specific may be lawful.
Ford Espania v Spain
concerning the ford car company
the charge was to the benefit of the trader. intended to raise revenue instead of providing a service. therefore it was unlawful.
commission v germany
some charges are permissable if the conditions
if the fee for the inspection did not exceed the cost of the inspection.
inspections were mandatory
inspections were prescribed by union law
if it promoted the free movement of goods.
commission v France
showed that a genuine tax is one which relates to a general system of internal dues.
does article 110 apply to third states?
seen in Co-Frutta case
this demonstrated that it does indeed apply to third member states. once goods enter then they are in circulation therefore there can be no further discrimination. therefore you cannot.
what did Lutticke show?
this is an example of Direct discrimination where tax is imposed on goods imported and not similar domestic goods. Luttickle showed this.
what did Humblot show?
showed indirect discrimination. higher tax on larger cars. this favoured french car producers.
what are the tests if a product is similar?
if they have similar characteristics
meet the same needs of consumers
do this on the basis on potential changes to consumer habits
commission v France
similar products. whether spirits made from wine and fruit were taxed more favourably than those made from other products.
found that these were similar products.
commission v Italy 184/86
held they were not similar.
they served different needs.
article 110? however there was a degree of competition between them. therefore it was unlawful discriminatory taxation.
