Part III
Substantive Law

14. Free Movement of Goods II: Positive Integration  

Cases

Download Content

  • Case 31/74 Galli
    Case 31/74 Filippo Galli (1975) ECR 00047; Free movement of goods, postitive integration, reference for a preliminary ruling, common organization of markets.Full Lisbonised Judgment
  • Case 35/76 Simmenthal
    Case 35/76 Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato v Simmenthal SpA (1978) ECR -00629; Free movement of goods, positive integration, precedence, conflicting national law.Full Lisbonised Judgment
  • Short summary
  • Case 120/78 Cassis de Dijon
    Case 120/78 Rewe-Zentral AG v Bundesmonopolverwaltung für Branntwein (Cassis de Dijon) (1979) ECR -00649; Free movement of goods, positive integration, measures having equivalent effect, obstacles to Intra-Community trade, fixing of a minimum alcohol content.Full Lisbonised Judgment
  • Short summary
  • Case 148/78 Ratti
    Case 148/78 Criminal proceedings against Tullio Ratti (1979) ECR -01629; Free movement of goods, positive integration, classification, packaging and labelling of solvents.Full Lisbonised Judgment
  • Short summary
  • Case 278/85 Commission v Denmark
    Case 278/85 Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Denmark (1987) ECR 04069; Free movement of goods, positive integration, approximation of laws, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances.Full Lisbonised Judgment
  • Case 300/89 Commission v Council (Titanium Dioxide)
    Case 300/89 Commission of the European Communities v Council of the European Communities (1991) ECR I-02867; Free movement of goods, positive integration, measures adopted by the institutions, choice of legal basis.Full Lisbonised Judgment
  • Case C-11/92 Gallaher
    Case C-11/92 The Queen v Secretary of State for Health, ex parte Gallaher Ltd, Imperial Tobacco Ltd and Rothmans International Tobacco (UK) Ltd (1993) ECR I-03545; Free movement of goods, positive integration, approximation of laws, labelling of tobacco products.Full Lisbonised Judgment
  • Case C-350/92 Spain v Council
    Case C-350/92 Kingdom of Spain v Council of the European Union (1995) ECR I-01985; Free movement of goods, positive integration, action for annulment, measures designed to establish the single market.Full Lisbonised Judgment
  • Short summary
  • Case C-359/92 Germany v Council
    Case C-359/92 Federal Republic of Germany v Council of the European Union (1998) ECR I-00973; Free movement of goods, positive integration, framework agreement on bananas, actions for annulment, quotas, right to property.Full Lisbonised Judgment
  • Opinion 1/94 (WTO Agreement)
    Opinion of the Court of 15 November 1994. - Competence of the [Union] to conclude international agreements concerning services and the protection of intellectual propertyOpinion
  • Case C-1/96 Compassion
    Case C-1/96 The Queen v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, ex parte Compassion in World Farming Ltd (1998) ECR I-01251; Free movement of goods, positive integration, quantitative restrictions on exports, justification.Full Lisbonised Judgment
  • Case C-376/98 Germany v Parliament and Council (Tobacco Advertising)
    Case C-376/98 Federal Republic of Germany v European Parliament and Council of the European Union (Tobacco Adveritsing Case) (2000) ECR I-08419; Free movement of goods, positive integration, advertising and sponsorship of tobacco products.Full Lisbonised Judgment
  • Short summary
  • Case C-3/00 Denmark v Commission
    Case C-3/00 Kingdom of Denmark v Commission of the European Communities (2003) ECR I-02643; Free movement of goods, positive integration, protection of health, stricter national provisions.Full Lisbonised Judgment
  • Joined Cases T-366/03 and T-235/04 Upper Austria v Commission
    Joined Cases T-366/03 and T-235/04 Land Oberösterreich and Republic of Austria v Commission of the European Communities (2005) ECR II-04005; Free movement of goods, positive integration, approximation of laws.Full Lisbonised Judgment
  • Case C-66/04 United Kingdom v Parliament and Council
    Case C-66/04 United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v European Parliament and Council of the European Union (2005) ECR I-10553; Free movement of goods, positive integration, smoke flavourings in foods, food regulation.Full Lisbonised Judgment
  • Case T-182/06 Netherlands v Commission (Air Pollution)
    Case T-182/06 Kingdom of the Netherlands v Commission of the European Communities (2007) ECR II-1985; Free movement of goods, positive integration, derogating national provisions.Full Lisbonised Judgment
  • Case C-58/08 Vodafone
    Case C-58/08 The Queen, on the application of Vodafone Ltd and Others v Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (2010) ECR I-04999; Free movement of goods, positive integration, roaming on public mobile telephone networks within the Community (EU).Full Lisbonised Judgment
  • Summary of Case C-380/03 Germany v Parliament and Council (Tobacco Advertising II)
    Case C-380/03 Germany v Parliament and Council (Tobacco Advertising II) [2006] Facts: The case concerned Directive 2003/33/EC, which was enacted as a replacement to Directive 98/43/EC which was annulled in Tobacco Advertising I. Germany sought the annulment of Arts 3 and 4 of the Directive, arguing that they could not be adopted on the basis…Short summary
  • C-84-94 United Kingdom v Council
    Case C-84/94 United Kingdom v Council [1996] Facts: The United Kingdom brought an action for the annulment of a Directive concerning weekly working time, paid annual leave and rest periods, adopted on the basis of Article 118a, alleging, among other reasons, that the legal base of the directive was defective. Held: The applicant contends that…Short summary
  • C-377-98 Netherlands v Parliament and Council
    Case C-377/98 Netherlands v Parliament and Council [2001] Facts: The Netherlands brought an action for annulment of a Directive on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions. Held: The Netherlands put forwards six pleas. The first plea was that Article 100a of the Treaty was the incorrect legal basis to adopt the Directive. Firstly, because the…Short summary