Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2002:434
Date: 2002-07-11
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Full Court
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Freedom to provide services;Free movement of workers
Concepts: General;Respect for private life
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: United Kingdom

Summary of the Judgment 
1. Freedom to provide services — Treaty provisions — Not applicable in sitnations 
purely internal to a Member State 
(Art. 49 EC) 
I - 6279 
SUMMARY — CASE C-60/00 
2. Freedom to provide services — Treaty provisions — Scope — Services provided to 
persons established in other Member States — Included — Possibility for the 
provider to rely on the Treaty provisions as against the Member State of establishment 
(Art. 49 EC) 
3. Freedom to provide services — Restrictions justified by reasons of public interest — 
Permissibility conditional on respect for fundamental rights — Observance ensured by 
the Community judicature — European Convention on Human Rights taken into 
consideration — Right to respect for family life — Decision to deport a person from a 
country where close members of his family are living 
(Art. 49 EC; European Convention on Human Rights, Art. 8) 
4. Freedom to provide services — Restrictions — National of a Member State estab­
lished in that State providing services in other Member States — Spouse who is a 
national of a third country refused right to reside — Measure constituting an 
infringement of the right to respect for family life guaranteed by the European 
Convention on Human Rights — Not permissible — Criterion 
(Art. 49 EC; European Convention on Human Rights, Art. 8) 
1. The provisions of the Treaty relating to 
the freedom to provide services, and 
the rules adopted for their implemen­
tation, are not applicable to situations 
which do not present any link to any of 
the situations envisaged by Community 
law. 
(see para. 28) 
2. The right freely to provide services 
guaranteed by Article 49 EC may be 
relied on by a provider as against the 
State in which he is established if the 
services are provided for persons estab­
lished in another Member State. 
(see para. 30) 
3. A Member State may invoke reasons of 
public interest to justify a national 
measure which is likely to obstruct 
the exercise of the freedom to provide 
services only if that measure is com­
patible with the fundamental rights 
whose observance the Court ensures. 
In that regard, the removal of a person 
from a country where close members of 
his family are living may amount to an 
infringement of the right to respect for 
I - 6280 
CARPENTER 
family life as guaranteed by Article 8 of 
the European Convention on Human 
Rights, which is among the fundamen­
tal rights which are protected in Com­
munity law. Such an infringement will 
infringe the Convention if such a 
decision does not meet the require­
ments of paragraph 2 of that article, 
that is unless it is 'in accordance with 
the law', motivated by one or more of 
the legitimate aims under that para­
graph and 'necessary in a democratic 
society', that is to say justified by a 
pressing social need and, in particular, 
proportionate to the legitimate aim 
pursued. 
(see paras 40-42) 
4. Article 49 EC, read in the light of the 
fundamental right to respect for family 
life, is to be interpreted as precluding a 
refusal by the Member State of origin 
of a provider of services established in 
that Member State who provides ser­
vices to recipients established in other 
Member States, of the right to reside in 
its territory to that provider's spouse, 
who is a national of a third country, if 
such a decision, which constitutes an 
infringement of the right to respect for 
family life, is not proportionate to the 
objective pursued. 
(see paras 45-46, operative part) 
I - 6281