Seminar 1 European Law (2016/2017), Utrecht University. 

Geanonimiseerd. 

European Law Seminar Week 1 (2016/2017)

Freedom of establishment & freedom to provide services

Question 1

Jay Booth is a famous doctor who holds a medical biology PhD from Trinity College Dublin. Although he has several years of experience and has extensively published in the area of postmenopausal birth, he cannot find a job in the currently declining Irish job-market. Therefore, he starts to provide technical and medical advice to a Bosnian private clinic where it is possible for postmenopausal women to give birth. Jay goes to Bosnia quite often. There, he analyses specific cases and organises meetings with the staff on these cases. The clinic pays him a small fortune for every case he works on. The clinic also provides him with the necessary facilities and equipment. Jay is further completely independent to organise his activities.

Can you explain which Treaty freedom Jay exercises?

Answer to question 1:

You have to choose one of the freedoms:

• Freedom of workers (art. 45 TFEU)
• Freedom of establishment (art. 49 TFEU)
• Freedom of providing services (art. 56 TFEU).

Jay has no freedom of workers (art. 45 TFEU), because he is not in service of a company, there is no subordination and he is independent.

Jay has no freedom of establishment. You must pursue ‘’an economic activity, through a fixed establishment in another Member State for an indefinite period’’, according to the Viking-case, par. 70.

The concept of establishment is a Community national to participate, on a stable and continuous basis, in the economic life of a Member State other than his State of origin and to profit therefrom (Gebhard-case, par. 25). This is not the case here, because Jay is not working for an indefinite period.

Providing of services is temporary (par. 26): you look at the duration of the service, its regularity, periodicity or continuity.

Providing services (Art. 56 TFEU)

Jay is providing services to the Italian private clinic (Article 56 TFEU). Jay is providing a medical service advice, which could be seen as activities of the professions (sub d). Jay gets remuneration, he gets paid for his services. Medical services fall within the scope of Article 56 TFEU. It is temporary, because he’s not continuously working on cases. He goes to Bosnia quite often, so he travels a lot, but he returns to Ireland. It’s not on a regular basis, there is no contract between Jay and Bosnia. The case doesn’t say anything about regularity. It doesn’t matter that Bosnia does offer facilities and equipment. This does not mean that Jay may not equip himself (par. 27).

Question 2

Suppose an English bookmaker, Doris Reader UK, established in the United Kingdom, carries on business as a bookmaker under a licence granted pursuant to the Betting, Gaming and Lotteries Act, which authorises Doris to carry on its activities in the United Kingdom and abroad. Doris offers the European public an extensive range of fixed sports bets on national, European and world sporting events.

On behalf of Doris, Petroni offers on the.....read more

Seminar 3 of the Course European Law (2016/2017), Utrecht University

Week 3

The Area of Freedom, Security and Justice

Question 1

1. Which policy areas does the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice encompass?

Answer to question 1a:

The Area of Freedom, Security and Justice is regulated by Article 3(2) TEU: ‘The Union shall offer its citizens an area of freedom, security and justice without internal frontiers, in which the free movement of persons is ensured in conjunction with appropriate measures with respect to external border controls, asylum, immigration and the prevention and combating of crime.’ 

According to this Article, the policy areas are border controls, immigration, asylum and the prevention and combating of crime.  

2. The Tampere European Council (1999) endorsed the principle of the mutual recognition of judicial decisions as the foundation of judicial cooperation in both civil and criminal matters. What does this principle entail?

Answer to question 1b:

The principle of the mutual recognition means that Member States have trust in one another and they recognize the judicial decisions of the other Member States, without checking the procedure that was followed. Member States should have the mutual trust that the procedure in the other Member State was right and the rights were guaranteed. This principle entails that the Member States work together and they trust each other. That’s why they recognize each other’s decisions.

There’s a distinction between criminal matters and civil matters.

Question 2

Mr. Ludy, a French citizen, has been living in Denmark since 2007. In 2011 he attends a seminar in Stockholm on “War and Social Media”. Mr. Ludy is one of the keynote speakers of the seminar. Mr. Ludy had arranged in advance that he could stay in the apartment of one of the organizers of the seminar, Miss Anna. That night Mr. Ludy and Miss Anna, reportedly had sex. The day after Mr. Ludy returns to Denmark. A few months later a Swedish Court sentenced Mr. Ludy in absentia to 10 years’ imprisonment for rape. No summon was served because the Swedish authorities were not aware of Mr. Ludy’s whereabouts. The Prosecutor’s Office of Stockholm issued an European Arrest Warrant is against Mr. Ludy for the execution of the sentence. Mr. Ludy gives himself up to the Copenhagen Police and is taken into a surrender hearing at the Court of Copenhagen. Before the Court of Copenhagen Mr. Ludy argues that he was not aware of the proceedings in Sweden. He believes his right of defense has been infringed. The decision of sentence has not yet been served to him in anyway. Look at the Council Framework Decision on the European Arrest Warrant.

1. Is it possible for Sweden to issue a European Arrest Warrant for Mr. Ludy?

Answer to question 2a:

Yes, it is possible to issue a European Arrest Warrant. According to Article 2 Council Framework Decision (CFD), there are to requirements which.....read more

Seminar 5 of the Course European Law (2016/2017), Utrecht University

This is a seminar about Week 6!

Week 6 European Law (Seminar 5)

Equal treatment in employment

Question 1

Which similarities and/or differences are to be discerned between the discrimination prohibition on the grounds of age, handicap, belief and sexual orientation of Directive 2000/78, and the discrimination prohibition on the ground of nationality of Article 45 TFEU?

Take regard of their personal and material scope and their interpretation by the ECJ.

Answer to question 1:

Differences: The discrimination prohibition on grounds of age, handicap, belief and sexual orientation fall within the scope of the Directive. This Directive concerns equal treatment in employment, without cross-border element. It’s about internal labour situations. Therefore, the Directive has to be implemented in national law. The Directive applies to the public sector. The Directive is based on article 19 TFEU. 

The discrimination prohibition on the ground of nationality does concern a cross-border element. It can be invoked in other Member States. Article 45 TFEU has a community meaning and is applicable in all of the Member States. Article 45 TFEU does not apply to the public service (par. 4). Article 45 TFEU could be regarded as a lex specialis to article 18 TFEU.

Similarity: Both discrimination prohibitions have the objective to protect workers in the European Union, but the Directive also applies to self-employed persons. The Directive has a broader scope. This is a difference, but they both concern workers.

Question 2

A private school employs 100 female teachers, of which 40 work part time, and 50 male teachers, of which 10 work part time. Ms. Peters, who works 4 hours a day, is a member of the school’s works council (WsC). According to national law, members of the WsC can perform their WsC’s tasks in working time and are being paid their salary according to their employment contract. One day, the members of the WC take a full day-training course in labour law. The full time members receive payment according to 8 hours, however Ms Peters is only paid according to 4 hours because this is her contractual working time per day.

1. Is Ms Peters discriminated against on the basis of EU law? If so, does it constitute direct or indirect discrimination, and on what discrimination ground?

Answer to question 2a:

Mention the primary legislation first, so that is article 157 TFEU. Also, mention the Directive 2006/54 EC! Also use the Bilka case, par. 27.

This question concerns the discrimination on ground of sex: There is no direct discrimination, because Ms. Peters is not treated less favourably because she works part-time and her colleagues are working full-time. However, the training is a full day, and this will cost Ms. Peters 8 working hours. However, she only receives remuneration for 4 hours.

There is indirect discrimination, because the neutral provision in national law, brings Ms. Peters in disadvantage, because.....read more