Classic Classic Quiz Free Movement of Goods by Diamondsareforever Diamondsareforever 201 played - 11 yrs ago A quiz about free movement of goods within the European Union QUIZ 30 QUESTIONS hard Europe 1 Which article prohibits customs duties? Art. 28 (1) tfeuArt. 30 tfeuArt. 110 tfeuArt. 110 (1) tfeuArt. 110 (2) tfeu 2 Which case holds that the prohibition of customs duties applies even when they did not have protectionism in mind? Commission v Italy (re Export Tax on Art Treasures)Commission v Italy (Re statistical levy)BrescianiCommission v BelgiumDiamantarbeider 3 Which article governs charges having equivalent effect? Art. 28 (1) tfeuArt. 110 tfeuArt. 30 tfeuArt. 110 (1) tfeuArt. 110 (2) tfeu 4 Which case held that you are allowed to recover costs from inspections that are mandatory and uniform under EU law? DiamantarbeiderCommission v Italy (Re Export Tax on Art Treasures)Commission v Italy (re Statistical Levy)BrescianiBauhuis 5 Which article governs prohibition on discriminatory taxes? Art. 110 tfeuArt. 34 tfeuArt. 36 tfeuArt. 14 tfeuArt. 15 tfeu 6 Which case held that indirectly discriminatory tax provisions are also unlawful? BauhuisCommission v GermanyCommission v UKDenkavit v FranceHumblot 7 Which case held that discrimination once they are within the state is also unlawful? Henn v DarbyDenkavit v FranceBauhuisCommission v GermanyHumblot 8 Which case relates to quantitative restrictions? Henn v DarbyDassonvilleCassis de DijonGeddo v EnteTorfaen BC v B&Q Plc 9 Which case held that "All trading rules enacted by Member States which are capable of hindering, directly or indirectly, actually or potentially, intra-Community trade" are not allowed? Cassis de DijonGeddo v EnteDassonvilleTorfaen BC v B&Q PlcCommission v Italy 10 Which case held that indistinctly applicable rules can be measures having equivalent effect if they have the potential for restricting trade? Cassis de DijonGeddo v EnteTorfaen BC v B&Q PlcCommission v ItalyMickelsson and Roos 11 Which case said that selling arrangements are not measures having equivalent effect? Geddo v EnteTorfaen BC v B&Q PlcCommission v ItalyMickelsson and RoosKeck 12 Which case held that governments can be responsible for the actions of private individuals if they hinder trade? Apple & Pear Development Council v LewisCommission v IrelandWalter RauCommission v France (Desordre Public)Keck and Mithouard 13 Which case relates to indirect discrimination Walter RauKeck v MithouardCommission v IrelandVerein gegn Unwesen in Handel und Gewerbe Koln v Mars GmbHAklagaren v Mickelsson Roos 14 Which case held that intentions do not matter all that matters is whether a trade barrier is created? Walter RauCommission v IrelandKeck v MithouardVerein gegen Unwesen in Handel und Gewerbe Koln v Mars GmbHAklagaran v Mickelsson Roos 15 Which case held that provisions which amount to an effective ban are not allowed? DeserbaisTorfaen BC v B&Q plcKonsumentombudsmannen v Gourmet International ProductsDouwe EgbertsCoates v Crown Prosecution Service 16 Which case held that advertising restrictions count where they would effect foreign products more than domestic ones? Walter RauA-Punkt Schmuckhandels GmbH v Claudia SchmidtKeck v MithouardVerein gegen Unwesen in Handel und Gewerbe Koln v Mars GmbHAklagaren v Mickelsson Roos 17 Which article contains the Treaty based derogations? Art. 36 tfeuArt. 140 tfeuArt. 79 tfeuArt. 231 tfeuArt. 83 tfeu 18 Which case held that indirectly discriminatory tax provisions may be justified if there is some objective policy reason which justifies them? Centre LeclercCampus OilChemialCommission v FranceConegate Ltd 19 Which of these cases was lawful? Campus OilCentre LeclercConegate LtdCommission v UKCassis de Dijon 20 Which case held that public morality is for the member state to determine? R v Henn and DarbyCommission v ItalyOfficiers van Justitie v SandozCommission v UKChemial 21 What did the restriction relate to in Officiers van Justitie v Sandoz? French poultryPetrolLove, love dollsMotorbike trailersMuesli bars 22 Which case gives rise to a list of areas where there may be justification for indistinctly applicable measures having equivalent effect? SchmidbergerVereinigte Familiapress Zeitungsverlags-und vertriebs GmbH v Heirich Bauer VerlagMicklesson and RoosDynamic MedienCassis de Dijon 23 Which case said you must balance fundamental rights with free movement of goods? Vereinigte Familiapress Zeitungsverlags-und vertriebs GmbH v Heinrich Bauer VerlagMicklesson and RoosSchmidbergerDynamic MedienCommission v UK 24 Which case relates to environmental protection? Mickelsson and RoosCommission v UKCommission v GermanyDynamic MedienBuet 25 Which case relates to protection of children? Commission v UKCommission v GermanyBuetA-Punkt Schmuckhandels GmbH v Claudia SchmidtDynamic Medien 26 Which case held that a Member State should choose means which least restrict free movement of goods? Deutsche Paracelsus SchulenWalter RauCommission v NetherlandsHerbert Karner v Troostwijk GmbHCommission v UK 27 Which case held that restrictions cannot be based on purely hypothetical situations? Commission v NetherlandsHerbert Karner v Troostwijk GmbHCommission v UKCommission v GermanyBuet 28 What was not allowed in Commission v Italy (Re Statistical Levy)? Charges to promote public interestFee for health inspections authorised by EU lawFee to gather information for benefit of exporters and importersSunday trading rulesProhibition on motorbikes towing trailers 29 What was not allowed in Mickelsson and Roos? Prohibition on personal water craft use on non-designated waterwaysMeasure that involves national examination and classification that has already been done in another state and changes labellingSelling arrangementsMinimum alcohol contentProhibition on Sunday trading 30 Which case held that general restrictions on advertising are not allowed? Douwe EgbertsCommission v IrelandWalter RauKeck and MithouardVerein gegen Unwesen in Handel und Gewerbe Koln v Mars GmbH A mistake in this Quiz ? Contact the author Commentaires
