Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2004:651
Date: 2004-10-21
Language of the case: German
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Association Agreement;External relations;Free movement of workers
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Austria

summary of its observations in point 35 of this Opinion. 15 – There are many such spheres. I would mention, among the spheres in which this case-law developed originally, the sphere of competition rules and that of the common agricultural policy. See, in general, Molinier, J., ‘Le contrôle juridictionnel et ses limites: à propos du pouvoir discrétionnaire des institutions communautaires’, in Rideau, J., (ed.), De la Communauté de droit à l’Union de droit. Continuités et avatars européens, LGDJ, Paris, 2000. 16 – Opinion delivered on 26 November 1996 in Joined Cases C-65/95 and C-111/95 Shingara and Radiom [1997] ECR I-3343. 17 – OJ, English Special Edition 1972 (I), p. 15. 18 – Case C-434/93 Bozkurt [1995] ECR I-1475, paragraphs 14 and 19, Tetik, cited in footnote 6, paragraph 20, and Case C-210/97 Akman [1998] ECR I-7519, paragraph 20. 19 – See, to that effect, Bozkurt, cited in footnote 18, paragraphs 14, 19 and 20; Tetik, cited in footnote 6, paragraphs 20 and 28; Case C-36/96 Günaydin [1997] ECR I-5143, paragraph 21; Case C-98/96 Ertanir [1997] ECR I-5179, paragraph 21; and Case C-1/97 Birden [1998] ECR I‑7747, paragraph 23. 20 – Judgment cited in footnote 7, paragraph 56. 21 – JO 1961 57, p. 1073. 22 – Case C-171/01 Wählergruppe Gemeinsam [2003] ECR I-4301. 23 – OJ, English Special Edition 1968 (II), p. 475. 24 – Paragraph 83 of the judgment. 25 – Point 63 of the Opinion delivered on 10 June 2004 in Case C-467/02 Cetinkaya, judgment of 11 November 2004, [2004] ECR I‑0000. 26 – Case C-192/89 Sevince [1990] ECR I-3461, paragraphs 29 and 31; Case C-237/91 Kus [1992] ECR I-6781, paragraph 33, and Tetik, cited in footnote 6, paragraphs 26, 30 and 31.