Freedom of Establishment and Freedom to Provide Services in the European Union
It consists in the right:[6] Services, nonetheless, according to settled case law, need to have an economic base, that it, a reward for what is being offered by the recipient.
[15] The Court requires that the individual circumstances of a patient justify waiting lists, and this is also true in the context of the UK's National Health Service.
Josemans v Burgemeester van Maastricht held that the Netherlands' regulation of cannabis consumption, including the prohibitions by some municipalities on tourists (but not Dutch nationals) going to coffee shops,[17] fell outside article 56 altogether.
The Court of Justice reasoned that narcotic drugs were controlled in all member states, and so this differed from other cases where prostitution or other quasi-legal activity was subject to restriction.
In Alpine Investments BV v Minister van Financiën[18] a business that sold commodities futures (with Merrill Lynch and another banking firms) attempted to challenge a Dutch law that prohibiting cold calling customers.
It bought fake laser gun services from a UK firm called Pulsar Ltd, but residents had protested against "playing at killing" entertainment.
The Court of Justice held that the German constitutional value of human dignity, which underpinned the ban, did count as a justified restriction on freedom to provide services.
[28] All people or entities that engage in economic activity, particularly the self-employed, or "undertakings" such as companies or firms, have a right to set up an enterprise without unjustified restrictions.
[29] The Court of Justice has held that both a member state government and a private party can hinder freedom of establishment,[30] so article 49 has both "vertical" and "horizontal" direct effect.
Restrictions on freedom of establishment could be justified by creditor protection, labour rights to participate in work, or the public interest in collecting taxes.
[38] Setting a further limit, in Cartesio Oktató és Szolgáltató bt the Court of Justice held that because corporations are created by law, they must be subject to any rules for formation that a state of incorporation wishes to impose.
[6] In June 2010 the Commission started infringement procedure against some member states – namely Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Luxembourg, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia and the United Kingdom – that had not communicate the measures they had adopted in order to transpose the directive.
[50] The rights to provide cross-border services in the field of finance is also guaranteed within the Union's legislative framework and it constitutes one of the pillars of the European single market.
[51] Since the implementation of free movement of capitals after the Single European Act (SEA), the subsequent Financial Services Action Plan (1999) and the recent launch of the Capital Markets Union under the Junker administration, several directives and regulations were proposed and adopted by the institutions in order to facilitate the process of cross-border provision of financial services.
The CMU project meant centralisation and delegation of powers at the supranational level with the field of macroeconomic governance and banking supervision being the most affected.
[65] According to European Commission, an integrated digital single market could increase EU gross GDP by more than 400 billion euro a year.
Among them we can cite, notably: More recently the European Commission under Ursula Von der Leyen proposed the introduction of a Digital Services Act[70] as a way to revise the "eCommerce Directive".
