Harmonisation in the EU – Summary and case law
Table of contents
Summary lectures ................................................................................................................................... 3
Lecture 1 – Introduction and general overview of the harmonisation phenomenon in the EU ......... 3
Lecture 2 – Mutual Recognition and professional qualifications ........................................................ 4
Lecture 3 – Services Directive & e-commerce directive...................................................................... 7
Lecture 4 – Personal Data Protection Policy ..................................................................................... 10
Lecture 5 – Asylum & Migration Policy ............................................................................................. 14
Lecture 6 – Public Procurement ........................................................................................................ 15
Lecture 7 – Gender Equality & Non-discrimination .......................................................................... 17
Lecture 8 – EU Health Policy.............................................................................................................. 19
Case law ................................................................................................................................................ 21
Lecture 1............................................................................................................................................ 21
Tedeschi......................................................................................................................................... 21
Commission v. France.................................................................................................................... 21
X-Steuerberatungsgesellschaft ...................................................................................................... 21
Gallaher ......................................................................................................................................... 21
Cassis de Dijon ............................................................................................................................... 21
Lecture 2............................................................................................................................................ 22
Morgenbesser ............................................................................................................................... 22
Lecture 3............................................................................................................................................ 23
Trijber & Harmsen ......................................................................................................................... 23
Visser Vastgoed ............................................................................................................................. 23
Airbnb Ireland ................................................................................................................................ 23
Uber Systems Spain ....................................................................................................................... 23
Star Taxi ......................................................................................................................................... 23
Lecture 4............................................................................................................................................ 24
Google Spain .................................................................................................................................. 24
Lecture 5............................................................................................................................................ 24
N.S. & M.E...................................................................................................................................... 24
Jawo ............................................................................................................................................... 24
1
,Lecture 6............................................................................................................................................ 25
Promoipresa .................................................................................................................................. 25
Tirkkonen ....................................................................................................................................... 25
FIGC ............................................................................................................................................... 25
Lecture 7............................................................................................................................................ 26
Defrenne II ..................................................................................................................................... 26
Defrenne III .................................................................................................................................... 26
Achbita........................................................................................................................................... 26
Tesco.............................................................................................................................................. 26
2
,Summary lectures
Lecture 1 – Introduction and general overview of the harmonisation phenomenon in the
EU
Overview
Two types of integration:
- Negative integration
- Positive integration ( → 288 TFEU)
Three types of competences:
- Exclusive competence (3 TFEU)
- Shared competence (4 TFEU)
- Competence of coordination and support (6 TFEU)
Types / techniques of harmonisation: X/Steuerberatungsgesellschaft
- Total harmonisation Tedeschi + Commission v. France
- Minimal harmonisation Gallaher
- Optional harmonisation
- Partial harmonisation
- Mutual recognition Cassis de Dijon
Definitions
Negative integration = prohibitions addressed to member states; ‘duty of non facere’
Positive integration = obligations imposed on member states to ensure that their national legislation
complies with EU law (harmonisation)
Exclusive competence = only the EU can act
Shared competence = if EU exercised its competence, member states cannot
Competence of coordination and support = member states remain competent, EU only facilitates
Principle of conferral = EU may only act when power to act within certain area was conferred upon it
Mutual recognition = marketed in all EU markets if legally marketed in one
Total harmonisation = member states cannot derogate from the EU standards, no leeway
Minimum harmonisation = minimal standards, but member states can go beyond these standards;
leaves some discretion to member states to set a higher standard than the minimum EU standard
Optional harmonisation = choice to comply with EU standards (harmonised rules) or national
standards from country of destination when products go cross-border
Partial harmonisation = EU harmonisation measures must apply when products go cross-border
3
,Lecture 2 – Mutual Recognition and professional qualifications
• Non-regulatory harmonisation policies → EU does not always need to adopt directives,
regulations or decisions to compel or to push member states to adopt certain behaviours
• How to solve a case before the CJEU:
o 1) Harmonisation?
o 2) If not, prohibition to restrict free movement?
o 3) If so, exception applicable? → Treaty exception or rule of reason
• Basic scheme of mutual recognition:
o 1) Harmonisation?
o 2) If not, free movement and no restriction of market access of products / services
o 3) Possible exceptions → Treaty exception or rule of reason
• Mutual recognition is just 1 way to approach harmonisation
• “CJEU blurred the distinction between positive and negative integration” → Mutual
recognition includes both: member states have a duty to recognise what other member states
are doing (accept their rules) AND have to refrain from having rules that would not allow the
marketing of products.
• CJEU came up with mutual recognition at the time where the EU could not reach consensus.
MR gave a choice: either accept what others are doing or adopt harmonised measures in which
consensus can be reached.
• If you have an overriding concern, you can claim an exception to the principle of MR
• Dual burden = burden to abide with the rules of other member states
• MR:
o Advantage = solves the dual burden to comply with different sets of rules
o Disadvantage = loss of sovereignty (someone else can impose standards on your
territory and citizens; potential loss of legitimacy) → Solution: exceptions are possible
– Host state regulations must be necessary
• Three models of MR:
o 1) Host state control – Producer needs to abide with the rules of the host state. For
the host state there is a non-discrimination clause: goods that are produced in another
member state must be accepted on your market.
▪ Dual burden
o 2) Home state control – Producer needs to abide with only 1 set of rules, namely the
rules of the home state.
▪ Moderated home state control = exceptions are possible
▪ No dual burden
o 3) Harmonisation of regulatory requirements – Adopting a single set of rules that
apply throughout the EU. If the product complies with that set of rules, the good can
circulate freely.
▪ No dual burden
• With regard to moderated home state control, three possible exceptions:
o 1. Market access test
o 2. Rule of reason
o 3. Comparative analysis of the home and host state requirements (Vlassopoulou)
• When you have a situation of moderated home state control, you need to run the market
access test, rule of reason AND comparative analysis
4
, • Mutual recognition with regard to harmonised measures:
o Country of origin principle – No exceptions allowed
o Single licence – Licence in one market means access to all other markets
o Harmonised set of substantive rules – Third model of MR
• MR also relates to other fields apart from goods and services:
o Duty to recognise judgements of other countries
o Duty to recognise EAW’s (with regard to criminal matters)
Important: the rule that always applies is that you first need to look at whether something is
harmonised. This also counts with regard to mutual recognition. If there is no harmonisation, you can
fall back on the general rules of the treaty and the treaty exceptions. If the principle of mutual
recognition is harmonised, for instance by way of regulatory requirements (a single set of rules that
apply throughout the EU), then you look at the regulation or directive for possible exceptions, but you
cannot use the general treaty exceptions and rule of reason to restrict products from entering your
market for instance.
• General rules when dealing with professional qualifications:
o If no EU legislation – Comparative analysis (Vlassopoulou)
o IF EU legislation – Establish whether you are dealing with a vertical approach or a
horizontal approach:
▪ Vertical – Sector-specific: specific rules for specific professions, applicable to
certain sectors (such as directives that are applicable to lawyers)
▪ Horizontal – General system of qualification requirements (duty to recognise
the qualifications by the host state, unless big differences in training)
• When both are present, you deal with the vertical one first
• Vertical approach
o Advantage = legal certainty
o Disadvantage = difficult to reach agreement + limited scope of those directives
• Horizontal approach
o Advantage = flexible system + no need to reach political agreement
o Disadvantage = lack of legal certainty (because more flexible and less detailed) +
complicated administrative procedure
• Recognition of Professional Qualifications directive (RPQ directive) uses both a vertical and a
horizontal approach
• Purpose of the RPQ directive can be found in article 1
• RPQ directive is only applicable to regulated professions, see article 3 for the definition
When there comes a question about professional qualifications, you first need to look again whether
there is a harmonised measure. A harmonised measure (either a regulation or a directive) can use a
vertical approach (specific rules for specific professions/sectors) or a horizontal approach (general
kinds of requirements). If there are multiple harmonised documents, the vertical approach goes first.
If there is no harmonised measure, so no EU legislation, you fall back on the general rules. That would
be the market access test, rule of reason, and the comparative analysis (Vlassopoulou).
5
Table of contents
Summary lectures ................................................................................................................................... 3
Lecture 1 – Introduction and general overview of the harmonisation phenomenon in the EU ......... 3
Lecture 2 – Mutual Recognition and professional qualifications ........................................................ 4
Lecture 3 – Services Directive & e-commerce directive...................................................................... 7
Lecture 4 – Personal Data Protection Policy ..................................................................................... 10
Lecture 5 – Asylum & Migration Policy ............................................................................................. 14
Lecture 6 – Public Procurement ........................................................................................................ 15
Lecture 7 – Gender Equality & Non-discrimination .......................................................................... 17
Lecture 8 – EU Health Policy.............................................................................................................. 19
Case law ................................................................................................................................................ 21
Lecture 1............................................................................................................................................ 21
Tedeschi......................................................................................................................................... 21
Commission v. France.................................................................................................................... 21
X-Steuerberatungsgesellschaft ...................................................................................................... 21
Gallaher ......................................................................................................................................... 21
Cassis de Dijon ............................................................................................................................... 21
Lecture 2............................................................................................................................................ 22
Morgenbesser ............................................................................................................................... 22
Lecture 3............................................................................................................................................ 23
Trijber & Harmsen ......................................................................................................................... 23
Visser Vastgoed ............................................................................................................................. 23
Airbnb Ireland ................................................................................................................................ 23
Uber Systems Spain ....................................................................................................................... 23
Star Taxi ......................................................................................................................................... 23
Lecture 4............................................................................................................................................ 24
Google Spain .................................................................................................................................. 24
Lecture 5............................................................................................................................................ 24
N.S. & M.E...................................................................................................................................... 24
Jawo ............................................................................................................................................... 24
1
,Lecture 6............................................................................................................................................ 25
Promoipresa .................................................................................................................................. 25
Tirkkonen ....................................................................................................................................... 25
FIGC ............................................................................................................................................... 25
Lecture 7............................................................................................................................................ 26
Defrenne II ..................................................................................................................................... 26
Defrenne III .................................................................................................................................... 26
Achbita........................................................................................................................................... 26
Tesco.............................................................................................................................................. 26
2
,Summary lectures
Lecture 1 – Introduction and general overview of the harmonisation phenomenon in the
EU
Overview
Two types of integration:
- Negative integration
- Positive integration ( → 288 TFEU)
Three types of competences:
- Exclusive competence (3 TFEU)
- Shared competence (4 TFEU)
- Competence of coordination and support (6 TFEU)
Types / techniques of harmonisation: X/Steuerberatungsgesellschaft
- Total harmonisation Tedeschi + Commission v. France
- Minimal harmonisation Gallaher
- Optional harmonisation
- Partial harmonisation
- Mutual recognition Cassis de Dijon
Definitions
Negative integration = prohibitions addressed to member states; ‘duty of non facere’
Positive integration = obligations imposed on member states to ensure that their national legislation
complies with EU law (harmonisation)
Exclusive competence = only the EU can act
Shared competence = if EU exercised its competence, member states cannot
Competence of coordination and support = member states remain competent, EU only facilitates
Principle of conferral = EU may only act when power to act within certain area was conferred upon it
Mutual recognition = marketed in all EU markets if legally marketed in one
Total harmonisation = member states cannot derogate from the EU standards, no leeway
Minimum harmonisation = minimal standards, but member states can go beyond these standards;
leaves some discretion to member states to set a higher standard than the minimum EU standard
Optional harmonisation = choice to comply with EU standards (harmonised rules) or national
standards from country of destination when products go cross-border
Partial harmonisation = EU harmonisation measures must apply when products go cross-border
3
,Lecture 2 – Mutual Recognition and professional qualifications
• Non-regulatory harmonisation policies → EU does not always need to adopt directives,
regulations or decisions to compel or to push member states to adopt certain behaviours
• How to solve a case before the CJEU:
o 1) Harmonisation?
o 2) If not, prohibition to restrict free movement?
o 3) If so, exception applicable? → Treaty exception or rule of reason
• Basic scheme of mutual recognition:
o 1) Harmonisation?
o 2) If not, free movement and no restriction of market access of products / services
o 3) Possible exceptions → Treaty exception or rule of reason
• Mutual recognition is just 1 way to approach harmonisation
• “CJEU blurred the distinction between positive and negative integration” → Mutual
recognition includes both: member states have a duty to recognise what other member states
are doing (accept their rules) AND have to refrain from having rules that would not allow the
marketing of products.
• CJEU came up with mutual recognition at the time where the EU could not reach consensus.
MR gave a choice: either accept what others are doing or adopt harmonised measures in which
consensus can be reached.
• If you have an overriding concern, you can claim an exception to the principle of MR
• Dual burden = burden to abide with the rules of other member states
• MR:
o Advantage = solves the dual burden to comply with different sets of rules
o Disadvantage = loss of sovereignty (someone else can impose standards on your
territory and citizens; potential loss of legitimacy) → Solution: exceptions are possible
– Host state regulations must be necessary
• Three models of MR:
o 1) Host state control – Producer needs to abide with the rules of the host state. For
the host state there is a non-discrimination clause: goods that are produced in another
member state must be accepted on your market.
▪ Dual burden
o 2) Home state control – Producer needs to abide with only 1 set of rules, namely the
rules of the home state.
▪ Moderated home state control = exceptions are possible
▪ No dual burden
o 3) Harmonisation of regulatory requirements – Adopting a single set of rules that
apply throughout the EU. If the product complies with that set of rules, the good can
circulate freely.
▪ No dual burden
• With regard to moderated home state control, three possible exceptions:
o 1. Market access test
o 2. Rule of reason
o 3. Comparative analysis of the home and host state requirements (Vlassopoulou)
• When you have a situation of moderated home state control, you need to run the market
access test, rule of reason AND comparative analysis
4
, • Mutual recognition with regard to harmonised measures:
o Country of origin principle – No exceptions allowed
o Single licence – Licence in one market means access to all other markets
o Harmonised set of substantive rules – Third model of MR
• MR also relates to other fields apart from goods and services:
o Duty to recognise judgements of other countries
o Duty to recognise EAW’s (with regard to criminal matters)
Important: the rule that always applies is that you first need to look at whether something is
harmonised. This also counts with regard to mutual recognition. If there is no harmonisation, you can
fall back on the general rules of the treaty and the treaty exceptions. If the principle of mutual
recognition is harmonised, for instance by way of regulatory requirements (a single set of rules that
apply throughout the EU), then you look at the regulation or directive for possible exceptions, but you
cannot use the general treaty exceptions and rule of reason to restrict products from entering your
market for instance.
• General rules when dealing with professional qualifications:
o If no EU legislation – Comparative analysis (Vlassopoulou)
o IF EU legislation – Establish whether you are dealing with a vertical approach or a
horizontal approach:
▪ Vertical – Sector-specific: specific rules for specific professions, applicable to
certain sectors (such as directives that are applicable to lawyers)
▪ Horizontal – General system of qualification requirements (duty to recognise
the qualifications by the host state, unless big differences in training)
• When both are present, you deal with the vertical one first
• Vertical approach
o Advantage = legal certainty
o Disadvantage = difficult to reach agreement + limited scope of those directives
• Horizontal approach
o Advantage = flexible system + no need to reach political agreement
o Disadvantage = lack of legal certainty (because more flexible and less detailed) +
complicated administrative procedure
• Recognition of Professional Qualifications directive (RPQ directive) uses both a vertical and a
horizontal approach
• Purpose of the RPQ directive can be found in article 1
• RPQ directive is only applicable to regulated professions, see article 3 for the definition
When there comes a question about professional qualifications, you first need to look again whether
there is a harmonised measure. A harmonised measure (either a regulation or a directive) can use a
vertical approach (specific rules for specific professions/sectors) or a horizontal approach (general
kinds of requirements). If there are multiple harmonised documents, the vertical approach goes first.
If there is no harmonised measure, so no EU legislation, you fall back on the general rules. That would
be the market access test, rule of reason, and the comparative analysis (Vlassopoulou).
5
