GDL Law Notes > Cambridge/Bpp/College Of Law GDL Law Notes > GDL EU Law Notes

Rights Of Establishment Notes

This is a sample of our (approximately) 6 page long Rights Of Establishment notes, which we sell as part of the GDL EU Law Notes collection, a Distinction package written at Cambridge/Bpp/College Of Law in 2017 that contains (approximately) 307 pages of notes across 36 different documents.

Learn more about our GDL EU Law Notes

The original file is a 'Word (Docx)' whilst this sample is a 'PDF' representation of said file. This means that the formatting here may have errors. The original document you'll receive on purchase should have more polished formatting.

Rights Of Establishment Revision

The following is a plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our GDL EU Law Notes. This text version has had its formatting removed so pay attention to its contents alone rather than its presentation. The version you download will have its original formatting intact and so will be much prettier to look at.

Revision: EU

A49 TFEU: abolishes restrictions on freedom of primary and secondary establishment - second paragraph provides for the right to pursue self-employed activities on an equal footing to HS nationals

Articles 50, 53 and 54 support A40 (54 - Freedom of Establishment to companies)

'Establishment' broadly covers professional/trade persons/self-employed - includes companies

Overlap btw the 4 freedoms - e.g. Commission v Italy (Re Freedom of Establishment) - Italian rules breached Freedom of Establishment, Freedom of Services and Free Movement of workers/persons

In Gebhard - CJ stated that its broad interpretative approach will be the same for all freedoms

Differences btw the four freedoms:

Gebhard: Right of establishment - right to install oneself in another MS - allows you to participate on a 'stable and continuous basis in the economic life of an MS other than state of origin' - Milano - 'with no foreseeable limit to its duration'

Freedom of services - more transient: difference btw the two not just an issue of duration - also regularity, periodicity, continuity : evidence of permanency for example buying licences/premises - Factortame (no 1)

Distinction btw establishmet/services in Directive 2005/36L but often still considered together Article 49 TFEU and Direct Effect

Initial problem giving DE to FE: Because 49 was dependent on A50 it couldn't fulfil VGL criteria of unconditionality - but due to the slow process of rolling programme under A50 - gave DE to 49

Reyners v Belgium - 'A49 imposes an obligation to attain a precise result, the fulfilment of which had to be made easier by, but not dependent on, the implementation of a programme of progressive measures'

Uncertainty as to horizontal application - Wouters JW and The International Transport Workers' Fed

Application of A49 TFEU to qualifications where there is no unifying EU legislation EU qualifications: Where there is no EU rules - MS can regulate access - no direct/indirect discrimination

Directly discriminatory - will only be saved by express treaty derogations under A51/52 - Reyners

Indirectly discriminatory: Ordre des Avocats v Klopp: rule applied to all Bar members vs. maintaining offices in other MS - indirectly discriminatory to German lawyers' applications for membership

The Mutual recognition of the equivalence of qualifications - to balance anti-discrimination with need for adequate qualifications (Thieffry): Satisfying French requirements (both academic +
professional) for equivalent qualification should have allowed entry to French bar - CJ expanded focus from non-discrimination to one of mutual recognition of the equivalence of qualifications

Any decision must be reached on objective basis - person concerned should be fully informed of reasons

UNECTEF v Heylens: Belgian football trainer's qualification refused by French ministry of Sport


Revision: EU

Where the CJ determined there is an obstacle to A49: must examine arguments of objective justification - balance btw equal treatment and legitimate MS requirements :

Vlassopoulou: If education, training, knowledge, acquired skills required for national qualification are equivalent to those in the HS then qualification should be recognised - Where MS has already allowed someone to practice then it is too late to quibble about qualification: practical experience must be taken into account - might make up for original diff in training

Fernandez de Bobadilla: practical experience: partial equivalence entitles MS to require full qualifications if no harmonising legislation - but this can be made up for by acquired skills:

So MS allowed to require missing qualification/knowledge but must take into account any knowledge gained by a course of study/practical experience

Hugo Fernando Hoscman: extended the Bobadilla approach even where there is a harmonising directive
- can still rely on A49 and case law and so ensure that acquisition of skills is taken into account Non-EU Qualifications - no right to acceptance in MS

If initial qualification earned outside EU but experience in EU - only the latter is credited

Halm: Dentistry qualification earned in Turkey - but period of training made up for lack of min requirement

Where an EU national obtains non-EU qualification which is recognised in some MS - doesn't mean it should be recognised in all (Tawil Albertini)

How much impediment is needed to breach A49?: very little needs to be shown to establish breach

Removal of obstacles approach - Gebhard: CJ said that MS rules for self-employed must be subject to standards: must be justified by an imperative requirement which is applied in a nondiscriminatory and proportionate manner

Caixa Bank France: tests of an obstacle widened - anything which could 'prohibit, impede or render less attractive' the pursuit of an occupation in >1 MS would be enough to amount to a restriction

Can A49 can be applied within the home state:

Asscher: Dutch national resided in Belgium: unjustified differentiated taxes for residents and nonresidents

Knoors: Dutch national obtained qualification in Belgium and returned home to practice trade: so long as there is a Directive in the area - then it must be allowed - unlike in Ministere Public v Auer
- no Directive

But A49 cannot apply to purely internal situations - EU element in Knoors

Community Legislation

Professional standards: must follow any Directive and ignore their own (Broekmuellen v Huisarts)

If no Directive: MS must follow case law and take into account qualifications/experience (Vlassopoulou) 2

****************************End Of Sample*****************************

Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our GDL EU Law Notes.