Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Free movement of goods — Trade barriers resulting from actions by private individuals — Obligations of the Member States — Adoption of measures to ensure the free movement of goods — Scope of the obligation — Acts affecting the flow of imports and exports and merely transit — (EC Treaty, Art. 5 (now Art. 10 EC) and Arts 30 and 34 (now, after amendment, Arts 28 EC and 29 EC)

2. Free movement of goods — Barriers to free movement by road between Member States resulting from the decision of a Member State not to prohibit a demonstration by protesters — Justification — Protection of the fundamental rights of the protesters — Need to balance the interests at stake — Principle of proportionality — Discretion of the national authorities — Limits — (EC Treaty, Art. 5 (now Art. 10 EC) and Arts 30, 34 and 36 (now, after amendment, Arts 28 EC, 29 EC and 30 EC)

Summary

1. Having regard to the fundamental role assigned to the free movement of goods in the Community system, in particular for the proper functioning of the internal market, the obligation upon each Member State to ensure the free movement of goods in its territory by taking the measures necessary and appropriate for the purposes of preventing any restriction due to the acts of individuals applies without the need to distinguish between cases where such acts affect the flow of imports or exports and those affecting merely the transit of goods.

see para. 60

2. The fact that the competent authorities of a Member State did not ban a demonstration by protesters which resulted in the complete closure of a major transit route between Member States for a given period is not incompatible with Articles 30 and 34 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 28 EC and 29 EC), read together with Article 5 of the Treaty (now Article 10 EC) provided that that restriction of trade in goods between Member States is justified by the legitimate interest in the protection of fundamental rights, in this case the protesters' freedom of expression and freedom of assembly, which applies both to the Community and the Member States.

In considering that justification, the interests involved must be weighed, namely the free movement of goods which may, in certain circumstances, be subject to restrictions for the reasons laid down in Article 36 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 30 EC) or for overriding requirements relating to the public interest, on the one hand, and the freedom of expression and freedom of assembly, which are also subject to certain limitations justified by objectives in the public interest, on the other, having regard to all the circumstances of the case in order to determine whether a fair balance was struck between those interests.

It is true that the national authorities enjoy a wide margin of discretion in that regard, but it is for the Court to determine whether the restrictions placed upon intra-Community trade are proportionate in the light of the legitimate objective pursued, namely, in the present case, the protection of fundamental rights.

Whilst a demonstration on a public highway usually entails inconvenience for non-participants, in particular as regards free movement, that inconvenience may in principle be tolerated provided that the objective pursued is the public and lawful demonstration of an opinion.

see paras 64 , 69, 74, 78-82, 91, 94, operative part