[Digitare qui] [Digitare qui] [Digitare qui]
Free Movement of goods
OBJECTIVES
The right to free movement of goods originating in Member States, and of goods from third countries
which are in free circulation in the Member States, is one of the fundamental principles of the Treaty
(Article 28 TFEU).
Originally, free movement of goods was seen as part of a customs union between the Member States,
involving the abolition of customs duties, quantitative restrictions on trade and equivalent measures,
and the establishment of a common external tariff for the Community. Later, the emphasis was laid on
eliminating all remaining obstacles to free movement of goods with a view to creating the internal
market.
ACHIEVEMENTS
The elimination of customs duties and quantitative restrictions between Member States was
accomplished by 1 July 1968. This deadline was not met in the case of the supplementary objectives.
Prohibition of charges having an effect equivalent to that of customs duties: Articles 28(1) and
30 TFEU
The Court of Justice of the European Union considers that any charge ‘which, if imposed upon a
product imported from a Member State to the exclusion of a similar domestic product has, by altering its
price, the same effect upon the free movement of products as a customs duty’ may be regarded as a
charge having equivalent effect, regardless of its nature or form.
Prohibition of measures having an effect equivalent to quantitative restrictions: Articles 34 and
35 TFEU
In its Dassonville judgment, the Court of Justice took the view that all trading rules enacted by Member
States which are capable of hindering, directly or indirectly, actually or potentially, intra-Community
trade are to be considered as measures having an effect equivalent to quantitative restrictions.
The Court’s reasoning was developed further in the Cassis de Dijon jurisprudence, which laid down the
principle that any product legally manufactured and marketed in a Member State in accordance with its
fair and traditional rules, and with the manufacturing processes of that country, must be allowed onto
the market of any other Member State. This was the basic reasoning underlying the debate on defining
the principle of mutual recognition, operating in the absence of harmonisation.
Importantly, the field of application of Article 34 TFEU is limited by the Keck jurisprudence, which states
that certain selling arrangements fall outside the scope of that article, provided that they are non-
discriminatory.
Exceptions to the prohibition of measures having an effect equivalent to that of quantitative
restrictions
Article 36 TFEU allows Member States to take measures having an effect equivalent to quantitative
restrictions when these are justified by general, non-economic considerations (e.g. public morality,
public policy or public security)
