a8fa5d68d1 Cassis: indistinctly applicable measures only; they must be proportionate Objective justification of discriminatory taxation ECJ has accepted the principle of objective justification for indirectly discriminatory taxation (eg Chemial Farmaceutici) but no systematic formulation of policy, by contrast to the Article 36 exceptions. measures which amount to a total or partial restraint of, according to circumstances, imports, exports or goods in transit. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Case 2: Cassis de DijonThe Cassis de Dijon case paved the way for a distinction between distinctly and indistinctly applicable measures. capable of hindering directly or indirectly, actually or potentially, intra-Community trade. The indistinctly applicable policy of the German government had effectively banned Cassis de Dijon from the German market. Exceptions/impediments to free movement of goods Article 36 derogation and Cassis This part of the answer requires a full analysis of the Article 36 derogation and the Cassis principles.You should draw out the similarities and differences and underline the heavy burden on states seeking to derogate. Scope of tariff barriers drawn widely by inclusion of CEEs (define, Diamonds).
France (Angry Farmers) (case C-265/95)) What Do Articles 34 and 35 Apply to? Articles 34 and 35 apply to "goods", which are defined in the "Art Treasures" case (Commission v. Art. Read more . The UK claimed that there was a public health grounds, and that it was necessary to protect the health of its citizens. The Court of Justice found this to be an acceptable Article 36 derogation. Exceptions stipulated in the Treaty. 345 TFEU is limited and mostly relates to expropriation. For example, a rule which targeted the size, shape, labeling or packaging of a particular product would be a 'product requirement' and prohibited by the ruling in Keck.
Talwak replied
476 weeks ago