Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The end of eastern territoriality? CJEU compliance in the new member states

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Comparative European Politics Aims and scope

Abstract

How does compliance with Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) rulings on patient mobility in the new Member States compare with the old Member States? Studying new Member States’ compliance practices would highlight the state of territoriality, the CJEU’s effective influence and the European healthcare union’s strength among the new Members. To provide a structured analysis and transferrable results, we compare Poland, the Czech Republic and Bulgaria with France and Germany. These countries are selected on the basis of commonalities in their systems’ organization. For the results for the old Member States, we rely on Obermaier’s 2009 ‘The End of Territoriality’. This study is qualitative in nature and relies mostly on qualitative semi-structured interviews with experts from ministries of health, health insurers and legal experts from all three countries. We distinguish between formal and informal compliance and based on this, we advance an analytical framework for a systematic study of CJEU compliance across the EU. Our findings produce a heterogeneous picture of these countries, with all three of them demonstrating different modes of compliance. This is because of distinct domestic conditions, ranging from insurance fund amenability and national court complaisance to state administration obstinacy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. A detailed review of these rulings will be omitted because of space limitations. For detailed analyses of the individual rulings and their ramifications, see Sieveking (2007), Obermaier (2008a), Baeten et al (2010).

  2. In benefits-in-kind systems, the payment for treatment takes place between the provider and the insurer, meaning that the patient does not have to pay for treatments and be reimbursed later as is the case in benefits-in-cash systems, for example, France or Belgium.

  3. Adopted in 2011, the Cross-border Patients’ Rights Directive summarizes previous rulings on patient mobility issued by the CJEU, and seeks to create legal clarity about the procedures and rules that apply in the context of planned medical treatments in other Member States.

  4. This legislation refers to O.J. no 120/2004, clause 1260 and 1261. – See further in Kowalska (2006).

References

  • Backes, C. and Eliantonio, M. (2010) Taking Constitutionalization One Step Too Far? The Need for Revision of the Rheinmühlen Case Law in the Light of the AG Opinion and the ECJ’S Ruling in Elchinov. Maastricht Faculty of Law Working Paper no. 2010/9: 1–22.

  • Baeten, R. (2011) Past impacts of crossborder health care. In: M. Wismar, W. Palm, J. Figueras, K. Ernst and E. van Ginneken (eds.) Cross-border Health Care in the European Union: Mapping and Analyzing Practices and Policies. Copenhagen, Denmark: European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, pp. 255–287.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baeten, R. (2012) Europeanization of national health systems, National impact and EU codification of the patient mobility case law, Brussels. OSE Paper Series.

  • Baeten, R., Vanhecke, B. and Coucheir, M. (2010) The Europeanisation of national health care systems: Creative adaptation in the shadow of patient mobility case law, Brussels. OSE Paper Series.

  • Beach, D. (2005) Why governments comply: An integrative compliance model that bridges the gap between instrumental and normative models of compliance. Journal of European Public Policy 12(1): 113–142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bellamy, R. (2008) The democratic constitution: Why Europeans should avoid American style constitutional judicial review. European Political Science 7(1): 9–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blauberger, M. (2014) National responses to European court jurisprudence. West European Politics 37(3): 457–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Budzyńska, M. (2008) Transgraniczne świadczenie usług zdrowotnych w UE – stan obecny i perspektywy. Biuletyn Analiz UKIE 21: 150–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • CMU (2012) Statistická ročenka. Prague, Czech Republic: Centra mezistátních úhrad.

  • CMU (2013) Statistická ročenka. Prague, Czech Republic: Centra mezistátních úhrad.

  • Conant, L.J. (2002) Justice Contained: Law and Politics in the European Union. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, A.L. and Bennett, A. (2005) Case Studies And Theory Development in The Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greer, S. (2012) Polity-making without policy-making: European Union healthcare services policy. In: J. Richardson (ed.) Constructing a Policy-Making State?: Policy Dynamics in the EU. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 270–291.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Greer, S.L. and Martín de Almagro Iniesta, M. (2014) How bureaucracies listen to courts: Bureaucratized calculations and European law. Law & Social Inquiry 39(2): 361–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Höpner, M. and Schäfer, A. (2012) Embeddedness and regional integration: Waiting for Polanyi in a Hayekian setting. International Organization 66(3): 429–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R.B. (1997) Examining the validity structure of qualitative research. Education 118(2): 282–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelemen, R.D. (2006) Suing for Europe adversarial legalism and European governance. Comparative Political Studies 39(1): 101–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelemen, R.D. (2011) Eurolegalism: The Transformation of Law and Regulation in the European Union. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kelemen, R.D. (2013) Judicialisation, democracy and European integration. Representation 49(3): 295–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kostera, T. (2008) Europeanizing healthcare: Cross-border patient mobility and its consequences for the German and Danish healthcare systems. Bruges Political Research Paper No. 7, May. Bruges Political Research Paper Series 7: 38.

  • Kowalska, I. (2006) The EU Patient Mobility System E – 112 in Poland. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann Stiftung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinsen, D.S. (2005) Towards an internal health market with the European court. West European Politics 28(5): 1035–1056.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinsen, D.S. (2015) Judicial influence on policy outputs?: The political constraints of legal integration in the European Union. Comparative Political Studies 48(12).

  • Martinsen, D.S. and Mayoral, J.A. (forthcoming) A judicialisation of healthcare policies in Denmark and Spain? The universalist healthcare model meets the European Union. Comparative European Politics.

  • Martinsen, D.S. and Vrangbaek, K. (2008) The Europeanization of health care governance: Implementing the market imperatives of Europe. Public Administration 86(1): 169–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Obermaier, A.J. (2008a) De-territorialization and De-structuring dynamics: The impact of ECJ patient mobility rulings on Germany, France and the United Kingdom. Paper presented at the Fourth Pan-European Conference of the ECPR Standing Group on the European Union, Riga, Latvia, September.

  • Obermaier, A.J. (2008b) Fine-Tuning the Jurisprudence: The ECJ’s Judicial Activism and Self-Restraint. Vieena: Institute for European integration research (EIF).

    Google Scholar 

  • Obermaier, A.J. (2009) The End of Territoriality?: The Impact of ECJ Rulings on British, German and French Social Policy. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sagan, A., Panteli, D., Borkowski, W. and Dmowski, M. (2011) Poland: Health system review. Health Systems in Transition 13(8): 1–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharpf, F.W. (2010) The asymmetry of European integration, or why the EU cannot be a ‘social market economy’. Socio-Economic Review 8(2): 211–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sieveking, K. (2007) ECJ rulings on health care services and their effects on the freedom of cross-border patient mobility in the EU. European Journal of Migration and Law 9(1): 25–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treib, O. (2014) Implementing and complying with EU governance outputs. Living reviews in European governance 3(5): 1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vasev, N.R. and Vrangbæk, K. (2014) Transposition and national level resources – Introducing the cross border health care directive in Eastern Europe. West European Politics 37(4): 693–711.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vollaard, H. (2016) Patient mobility, changing territoriality and scale in the EU’s internal market. Comparative European Politics doi:10.1057/cep.2016.8.

  • Vollaard, H. and Martinsen, D.S. (2016) The rise of a European healthcare Union. Comparative European Politics doi:10.1057/cep.2016.3.

  • Wismar, M., Palm, W., Figueras, J., Ernst, K. and Ginneken, E.v. (2011) Observatory Study Series No. 22. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe on behalf of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Copenhagen, Department of Political Science, Øster Farimagsgade 5, Copenhagen, 1353, Denmark

    Nikolay Vasev & Karsten Vrangbæk

  2. Masarykova univerzita – Pravnicka fakulta (Faculty of Law), Veveri 70, Brno, 611 80, Czech Republic

    Filip Křepelka

Authors
  1. Nikolay Vasev
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Karsten Vrangbæk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Filip Křepelka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nikolay Vasev.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vasev, N., Vrangbæk, K. & Křepelka, F. The end of eastern territoriality? CJEU compliance in the new member states. Comp Eur Polit 15, 459–477 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1057/cep.2016.9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/cep.2016.9

Keywords

Search

Navigation