Advertisement

Reverse Discrimination in EU Law: An Internal Market Perspective

Chapter

Abstract

An analysis of the case law of the Court of Justice suggests that, over the years, the category of purely internal situations has been deprived of all substantive meaning and that, as a result, it has turned into an old-fashioned dignitary, usually disregarded but occasionally invoked in sensitive cases. This research investigates the expansive tendencies towards purely internal situations in the internal market, arguing that the Court is evolving in its position on reverse discrimination. In fact, while initially the ECJ held this legal phenomenon to be irrelevant, it is now exploring new avenues by which to possibly give European relevance to purely internal situations and reverse discrimination. To better understand this trend, this research categorises the Court’s case law into several phases. First, emphasis is placed on the Court’s approach of softening the cross-border test in order to intervene in domestic cases (the so-called cross-border hypothetical test). Then, this study detects the existence of cases where the ECJ evaluates the opportuneness of claiming competence in internal situations in a spirit of cooperation with national courts (potential usefulness approach). Finally, recent developments seem to base the ECJ’s jurisdiction in domestic situations directly on national legal systems (actual usefulness test). This last strategy is innovative and entails unexplored consequences, returning to Member States the power to determine what kinds of differences they will acknowledge as justifying differential treatment and what kinds they will deny within the scope of their competences.

Keywords

Reverse discrimination Purely internal situations Internal market EU citizenship EU law scope of application Principle of conferral 

References

  1. Adam S, Van Elsuwege P (2012) Citizenship rights and the Federal balance between the European Union and its member states: comment on Dereci. Eur Law Rev 37:176–190Google Scholar
  2. Barents R (2010) The court of justice after the treaty of Lisbon. Common Mark Law Rev 47:709–728Google Scholar
  3. Barnard C (2001) Fitting the remaining pieces into the goods and persons Jigsaw. Eur Law Rev 26:35–59Google Scholar
  4. Broberg M, Fenger N (2014) Preliminary references to the European court of justice, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  5. Couronne V (2010) L’autonomie procédurale des Etats membres de l’Union Européenne à l’épreuve du temps. Cahiers de Droit Européen 46:273–309Google Scholar
  6. Craig P (2011) The ECJ and ultra vires action: a conceptual analysis. Common Mark Law Rev 48:395–437Google Scholar
  7. Davies G (2003) Nationality discrimination in the European internal market. Kluwer, The Hague, London, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Davies G (2011) Discrimination and beyond in European economic and social law. Maastricht J Eur Comp Law 18:7–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Davies G (2012) Activism relocated: the self-restraint of the European court of justice in its National Context. J Eur Publ Policy 19:76–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. de Búrca G (2013) After the EU charter of fundamental rights: the court of justice as a human rights adjudicator? Maastricht J Eur Comp Law 20:168–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. De Groot GR, Seling A (2011) Annotation, Case C-135/08. Case note 2: the consequences of the Rottman judgment on member state autonomy; the European court of Justice’s Avantgardism in nationality matters. Eur Const Law Rev 7:150–160Google Scholar
  12. de Witte B (2011) National equality institutions and the domestication of EU non-discrimination law. Maastricht J Eur Comp Law 18:157–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dubout E, Maitrot de la Motte A (eds) (2013) L’Unité des libertés de circulation. Bruylant, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  14. Ellis E, Watson P (2012) EU anti-discrimination law. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hanf D (2011) Reverse discrimination in EU law: constitutional aberration, constitutional necessity, or judicial choice. Maastricht J Eur Comp Law 18:29–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hatzopoulos V (2011) The concept of ‘economic activity’ in the EU treaty: from ideological dead-ends to workable judicial concepts. Research paper in law 06/2011, European legal studies, College of Europe. http://aei.pitt.edu/39384/1/researchpaper_6_2011_hatzopoulos.pdf. Accessed 31 Dec 2016
  17. Hatzopoulos V (2012) Regulating services in the European Union. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Iglesias Sanchez S (2010) ¿Hacia una nueva relación entre la nacionalidad estatal y la cuidadanía europea? TJUE, Sentencia de 2 de marzo de 2010 (gran sala), Janko Rottmann C. Freistaat Bayern, Asunto C-135/08. Revista de Derecho Comunitario Europeo 37:933–950Google Scholar
  19. Jacqué J-P (2004) The principle of institutional balance. Common Mark Law Rev 4:383–391Google Scholar
  20. Jacqué J-P (2011) The accession of the European Union to the European convention on human rights and fundamental freedoms. Common Mark Law Rev 48:995–1023Google Scholar
  21. Jessurun d’Oliveira HU (2011) Annotation, Case C-135/08. Case Note 1: Decoupling Nationality and Union Citizenship? Eur Const Law Rev 7:138–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Johnson E, O’Keefe D (1994) From discrimination to obstacles to free movement: recent developments concerning the free movement of workers, 1989–1994. Common Mark Law Rev 31:1313–1346Google Scholar
  23. Kochenov D (2010) Annotation, Case C-135/08. Common Mark Law Rev 47:1831–1846Google Scholar
  24. Kochenov D (2012) The present and the future of EU citizenship: a Bird’s eye view of the legal debate. Jean Monnet Working Paper, NYU Law School. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2063200. Accessed 31 Dec 2016
  25. Kochenov D, Plender R (2012) EU citizenship: from an incipient form to an incipient substance? The discovery of the treaty text. Eur Law Rev 37:369–396Google Scholar
  26. Kostakopoulou D (2013) Co-creating EU citizenship: institutional process and Crescive norms. Camb Yearb Eur Leg Stud 15:255–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kostakopoulou D, Guild E, Gortázar-Rotaeche C (2014) Symposium on the reconceptualisation of European Union Citizenship. Eur Law J 20:444–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lenaerts K (2011) European Union law, 3rd edn. Sweet and MaxwellGoogle Scholar
  29. Mengozzi P (2011) La sentenza Zambrano: prodromi e conseguenze di una pronuncia inattesa. Studi sull’integrazione europea 3:417–432Google Scholar
  30. Mortelmans KJM (1980) La discrimination à rebours et le droit communautaire. Diritto Comunitario e degli Scambi Internazionali XIX:1–30Google Scholar
  31. Nic Shuibhne N (2002) Free movement of persons and the wholly internal rule: time to move on? Common Mark Law Rev 39:731–771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nic Shuibhne N (2010) The resilience of EU market citizenship. Common Mark Law Rev 47:1597–1628Google Scholar
  33. Nic Shuibhne N (2013) The Coherence of EU free movement law: constitutional responsibility and the court of justice. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Odudu O (2009) Economic activity as a limit to community law. In: Barnard C, Odudu O (eds) The outer limits of EU law. Hart, Oxford and Portland, Oregon, pp 225–243Google Scholar
  35. Oliver P, Roth WH (2004) The internal market and the four freedoms. Common Mark Law Rev 41:407–441Google Scholar
  36. Platon S (2012) Le champ d’application des droits du citoyen européen après les arrêts Zambrano, McCarthy, Dereci. Revue trimestrielle de droit européen 48:23–52Google Scholar
  37. Poiares Maduro M (1998) We the court: the European court of justice and the European economic constitution—a critical reading of article 30 of the treaty. Hart, Oxford and Portland, OregonGoogle Scholar
  38. Poiares Maduro M (2000) The scope of European remedies: the case of purely internal situations and reverse discrimination. In: Kilpatrick C et al (eds) The future of remedies in Europe. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 117–140Google Scholar
  39. Ritter C (2006) Purely internal situations, reverse discrimination, Guimont, Dzodzi and article 234. Eur Law Rev 31:690–710Google Scholar
  40. Rossi LS (2010) Les rapports entre la Charte des droits fondamentaux et le Traité de Lisbonne. In: Chemins de l’Europe—Mélanges en l’honneur de Jean Paul Jacqué. Dalloz, Paris, pp 609–625Google Scholar
  41. Sarmiento D (2013) Who’s afraid of the charter? The court of justice, National Courts and the new framework of fundamental rights protection in Europe. Common Mark Law Rev 50:1267–1304Google Scholar
  42. Schmidt SK (2012) Who cares about nationality? The path-dependent case law of the ECJ from goods to citizens. J Eur Publ Policy 19:8–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Seling A (2010) Annotation, Case C-135/08: towards a direct ‘Droit de regard’? Maastricht J Eur Comp Law 17:470–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Spaventa E (2008) Seeing the wood despite the trees? On the scope of Union citizenship and its constitutional effects. Common Mark Law Rev 45:13–45Google Scholar
  45. Spena G (2014) Gli effetti indiretti del diritto dell’UE nell’ordinamento nazionale: Le discriminazioni alla rovescia tra Corte di giustizia e Consiglio di Stato. Diritto Comunitario e degli Scambi Internazionali 53:589–622Google Scholar
  46. Tagaras H (1999) Règles Communautaires de libre circulation, discriminations à rebours et situations dites ‘purement internes’. In: Dony M, de Walsche A (eds) Mélanges en hommage à Michel Waelbroeck, vol 2. Bruylant, Brussels, pp 1499–1538Google Scholar
  47. Tryfonidou A (2006) Case C-293/02, Jersey Produce Marketing Organisation Ltd v States of Jersey and Jersey Potato Export Marketing Board: judgment of the court (grand chamber) of 8 November 2005, not yet reported. Common Mark Law Rev 43:1727–1742Google Scholar
  48. Tryfonidou A (2008) Reverse discrimination in purely internal situations: an incongruity in a citizens’ Europe. Leg Issues Econ Integr 35:43–67Google Scholar
  49. Tryfonidou A (2009) Purely internal situations and reverse discrimination in a citizens’ Europe: time to “reverse” reverse discrimination? In: Xuereb PG (ed) Issues in social policy: a New Agenda. Jean Monnet Seminar Series. Progress Press, Valletta, pp 11–29Google Scholar
  50. Tryfonidou A (2010) Further steps on the road to convergence among the market freedoms. Eur Law Rev 35:36–56Google Scholar
  51. Van Elsuwege P (2011) Shifting the boundaries? European Union citizenship and the scope of application of EU law—Case No. C-34/09, Gerardo Ruiz Zambrano v Office national de l’emploi. Leg Issues Econ Integr 38:263–276Google Scholar
  52. Van Elsuwege P (2014) The phenomenon of reverse discrimination: an anomaly in the European constitutional order? In: Rossi LS, Casolari F (eds) The EU after Lisbon: amending or coping with the existing treaties? Springer, Heidelberg, pp 161–176Google Scholar
  53. Weiler JHH (2009) Europa: ‘Nous coalisons des Etats, nous n’unissons pas des hommes’. In: Cartabia M, Simoncini A (eds) La sostenibilità della democrazia nel XXI secolo. Il Mulino, Bologna, pp 51–83Google Scholar
  54. Wiesbrock A (2011) Disentangling the ‘Union citizenship puzzle’? The McCarthy case. Eur Law Rev 36:861–874Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Alma Mater Studiorum – Università degli Studi di BolognaBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations