Analysis of Cases Concerning European Union Law - Essay Example

EU law Question Advice Christian and Minh as to their rights to exit, enter, reside and work under EU law, as well as Mia’s rights. The European law guarantees all citizens from member countries fee entry and exit to all EU member countries. A citizen in a member nation has the exclusive right to work and reside in any country without visa or work permit restrictions.1 This is in line with the founding pillars of the EU that was to establish an exclusive economic zone where there is free movement of goods and labor.2 In this respect, any person has the right to stay and work in any country as long as he or she has valid and official documents to prove that he or she is a citizen of a member country. Christian is a registered Danish citizen. Consequently, Denmark is an EU member country. The logic now sails through that Christian has the right to reside in the UK alongside his family. According to the EU charter Article 21(1) TFEU, every citizen of a country that is member of the EU has the right to move and also reside in any country that is a member of the union; however, the rights are subject to conditions laid down by the treaty.3 This clause states that citizens of member countries are not supposed to be distinguished by services offered by the state. In fact, the state is supposed to treat them as equals with the citizens, with equal employment opportunities, social security and other citizenship privileges. The law extends to the fact that any EU citizen can complain about services offered in the country in which he or she is a resident and a taxpayer. The carter provides for free passage and residence as long as; the person does not pose a public policy risk and is not a strain of public finances. Since he is not dependent and has a level of employable skills, Christian can reside in the UK indefinitely. Minh is a legal wife to Christian. Under EU law, a person married to a citizen of an EU member country gains automatic access to privileges enjoyed by citizens of the EU countries. In this regard, Minh has the legal right to stay in the UK as long as she is Christian wife. The EU recognizes the social setting and importance of incorporating family members who are not citizens of EU member countries. This applies and is limited to the nuclear family which includes parents and children. The only requirement to officiate the union is the presence of a marriage certificate from a recognized source that state the couple is in a familial relationship. Available information show that Minh has tried to apply for employment at a London college. It implies that she legible under UK labor laws to work and reside in the country. Therefore, Christian’s family is legally in the UK as far as he is in the country and is duly registered citizen in Denmark. Consequently, Minh is a professional who does not pose any social risk or strain on public resources. As set out in Chen & Ors. v Secretary of State for the Home Department 4, a child who is born in the EU from parents who are citizens or non-citizens of EU member countries becomes an automatic member of the EU. In regard to Mia, she has absolute rights to enter, exit or stay in the United Kingdom. Her legal rights as a child also need a guardian thus her parents reserve the right to reside and work in the EU countries. According to the EU charter, social justice requires that the family of a citizen be treated as equals in rights despite their citizenship.5 The rights of children to parental care are not negotiable under the EU. In ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, the court unanimously ruled that a child’s best interests are supposed to be the leading issue in any case involving a parent. Thus, the British court may have to reconsider the deportation order issued against Christian. Though Mia has support of both parents, absence of one may make her life change based on the relationship between her and Christian.6 This implies that the actions of Christian do not affect his family but rather him individually as a citizen in the EU. So, Mia is protected by both the European Union Law and also the UK laws. Question 2 Advise Christian as to his right to stay in the UK and his related procedural rights under EU law. Every citizen from EU member countries has the right to work, reside and enter or exit any member country without restrictions. The EU charter is clear that a citizen from a member nation cannot be discriminated in any way in a country that is a member of the union. Such privileges include education, work, tax advantages and also equal access to social services such as medical and security. The idea is to give the members virtual citizenship to all member countries. The conditions above all point to the fact that Christian has the right to work in the UK. As an editor, Christian is a promising worker who can find his own fortune and earn a living in the UK. As critics would argue that Christian is a person dependent on social aid, it is absolutely true given the fact that he is employed at a below minimum wage and also is given a house by a charity organization. However, the conditions were set out in the work agreement between the business and Christian; thus, the housing is an offer rather than social assistance by the public. The EU charter states that a person has a right to stay in the country even if he is unemployed. However, he must prove that he has the qualifications that can be useful in the host country and that he is actively involved in job search. This is meant to reduce the burden in public resources. In this case, Christian has the qualifications of an editor to get a well-paying job in the UK. His current status as an underpaid worker is not by merit but will. Thus, the UK has no right to deport him based on the fact that he is underpaid. On the issue of protest on National Health Service (NHS), the EU stipulates that a citizen of a country residing in a member country has s as those of the citizens. The rights to education and medical services are mandatory to all citizens, whether native or migrants.7 As such, Christian had the right to demonstrate on the issues of cuts on the NHS. This is because he was a direct beneficiary of the service. Despite that fact that British authorities treat it as a case of disruption of public order, it does not pose a risk to social or national interest or security of the country. Thus, any action to deport him would violate his rights as an EU citizen and the rights of his daughter as stipulated in ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for the Home Department.8 Most EU nations allow for a set period of time when an immigrant has the leeway to work without a permit. However, it is important for Christian to understand that there are laws in individual countries that require applications of work permits or permanent citizenship after a set period of time. Christian thus needs to realize the laws in the UK that applies to his status or professional. Permanent residence, for example, would require good conduct, employment in the UK and no criminal records. As the law applies, Christian has the right to be subjected to the same employment opportunities and also be recruited under the similar conditions as the natives.9 Since the effective labor laws are harmonized, Christian is legible to lodge complaints against the government moves to reduce the funding on NHS. This can be supported by the fact that Christian and his family are direct beneficiaries of the service. The overall impression is that he should be part of the peaceful protest and hold also be treated the way a citizen would have been treated, that is, be charged like UK citizens with deportation out of question. Question 3 What are Elisa’s right to set up her internet business in the UK and could the Danish authorities object to it? According to the European Union law, a citizen from a member country has the right to start and run a business in any member country. Consequently, the application processes that are followed originate from the EU charter and laws of the host country. The law also assert that a business in a member country can start a subsidiary in any country by virtual of being a registered firm in another EU country. This implies that Danish citizen has the right to start a business, a private company or proprietorship in the UK as long as UK laws are business or company laws are followed. This means that Elisa reserves a privilege to start and run a saddles online business in the United Kingdom. The need to simulate trade and business among EU members makes it easier to register a business in the EU. Restrictions are lifted, and business registration process simplified to; setting a business in less than 3 days, cost not more than €100 and registered through a single body. Since she is registered a citizen in a member country, Elisa reserves the right to start a company by using only her identification documents and necessary documents required for registration.10 With all the factors satisfied, the Danish authorities should not interfere with business registration process that has gone through in another country applying the same laws. The process of registering a business in the UK does not discriminate non-citizens. The application process is similar to all businesses registered in the country. Elisa’s business has no limitation in the British system. However, there is a problem on the Danish side. According to EU law, business registration application cannot be declined unless there is a serious violation of national economic or security interests.11 The state of Denmark needs to assess the scenario and establish facts which indicate that it is not acting on protectionism policy that is against the EU policies.12 The EU is built on a competitive free market system where protectionism is not encouraged. In fact, it amounts to a violation of trade rights established in the EU law.13 The complaints by Danish manufacturers of saddles show that they pressure the government motivated by self-interest rather that protection of horses. In this regard, the Danish government is supposed to treat Elisa’s business as a competitor to the countries saddle businesses. Based on scientific findings on the effect of French saddles on the horses backs, appropriate can take effect depending on the internal laws of the Danish society in regard to animal rights. Nevertheless, if the saddles are not sold in the country, inspection and determination should be done by the recipient nation; thus, the Danish authorities should retain charges limited to the business extent conducted in Denmark, and not in the UK. Question 4 Can the charges for inspections and warehousing be applied by Denmark to saddles importers? Denmark retains the right to inspect any items that are imported to the country whether by a subsidiary or a parent company. Consequently, the government inspections are meant to ensure that it imports quality items and also exports them in good condition.14 As long as the measure is not aimed at killing new ventures, the Danish government retains an exclusive right to inspect all the imports into Denmark. The European law stipulates that a warrant to inspect any imports in the country is supposed to be done by a professional body which in turn charges an acceptable charge. However, from the data presented, the government is engaging in premeditated action aimed at killing Elisa’s venture as soon as it emerges.15 The high costs that are planned are aimed at increasing the cost of doing business in the country that would lead to higher price tags on saddles from Chavel Equipement. It is clear that the government is imposing charges that do not have legal backing of the European law. Charges on warehousing and storage can be instituted by the source and recipient country. This is because the European Union covers inter country trade and not the storage of goods. In this regard, the Danish authorities have the right to exercise the charges on Elisa’s imports. It is now up to Elisa to negotiate a business deal with the government and other stakeholders on how the charges can be relaxed so as she can conduct the tractions in the best possible environment.16 Since the saddles are exported to the UK, Quality inspections are important to the reputation of the country’s exports and thus maintain crucial business partners. As the findings of the said research show, French saddles harm the backs of the horses. This could be damaging to the export market of Denmark. In this regard, charging higher inspection and storage costs may offset the effect of damaged reputation. Question 5 Can the Danish authorities impose inspections on the French saddles and prohibit their advertisement and use? As discussed above, imports from fellow members of the EU are not subject to restrictions as long as they are at par with national laws of Denmark. The imports in questions must be of acceptable nature, quality and kind and should also be legal under the laws of Denmark and the EU. This implies that the country cannot impose restriction as this would entail a gross violation of the EU charter.17 In the light of Elisa’s case, the inspection of saddles her company is willing to import from France is based on the allegations firm the local manufacturers and a cited research that indicate negative effects on horsebacks. Given the issues raised, the inspection of the items is supposed to be done on the contentious parts. It is utterly out of order to challenge the overall nature of the products and impose heavy charges on the importer of a commodity from an EU member that abides by the same rules of safety and inspections. In so doing, the Danish authorities risk double charging on inspection on the same commodities.18 It is expected that, as an abiding member of the EU, France has inspected the goods before they are exported and meet the required quality and safety standards. This diminishes the chances of the Danish government to raise serious argument to support its course. On the issue of advertisement, it is common in the EU that members nation do not prohibit attempts by firms from other nations to sell their products. Advertising is a way of enlightening the customers about the product and thus it does not pressure anyone to buy or use the product. The method of persuasion is simply harmless, and thus prohibition is not a suitable alternative for a country that relies on business from other members. When an advertisement is not in line with the country’s policies, it is supposed to expound as much as possible with the inclusion of effects so as to enable users to make wise decisions. A democratic society allows every person to access information and goods for persona satisfaction as long as they do not disrupt social order or compromise national interests. Advertisements on the saddles should include the side effects are outlined by the government so as people can make informed decisions. Banning advertisement of Elisa’s saddles in Denmark would violate the rights of a duly registered business in the UK.19 This is an avenue for a crisis in the EU charter. Bibliography Table of legislation Non –discrimination, Article 21(1)TFEU Statute for a European Company (2001).Council Regulation (EC) No 2157/2001 Court cases Chen & Ors. v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] ECR I-9925 VALE Építési kft [2012] July 12, 2012 Case C-378/10 ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] UKSC 4 (1 February 2011) Secondary sources Atkinson, Tony, Bea Cantillon, Eric Marlier, and Brian Nolan. "Social Indicators: The EU and Social Inclusion." (2002) 28. Bishop, Bernard. European Union Law for International Business: An Introduction. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009) 3-5. Crombez, Christophe, and Wim V. Gestel. "The treaty of Lisbon and European Union trade policy: A political-economic analysis." (2011) 38-45. Davies, A C. L. Eu Labour Law. (Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Pub, 2012) 78-80. Dine, Janet, Marios Koutsias, and Michael Blecher. Company Law in the New Europe: The Eu Acquis, Comparative Methodology and Model Law. (Cheltenham, UK: E. Elgar, 2007) 160-166. Djankov, Simeon, Caralee McLiesh, and Michael Klein. Doing Business in 2006: Creating Jobs. (Washington, D.C: World Bank, 2006). Ehrlich, Sean D. "How Common is the Common External Tariff?Domestic Influences on European Union Trade Policy." European Union Politics (2009): n. pag. European Commision. "Business Dynamics: Start-Ups, Business Transfers And Bankruptcy." European Commission  (2011): 18-32. European Court of Justice. N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Mar. 2014. . European Union. "Employmnet, Social Affairs and Inclusion." Europa. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Mar. 2014. . European Union. "Free movement of people: five actions to benefit citizens, growth and employment in the EU." N.p., Web. 26 Mar. 2014. . European Union. "Start-ups." N.p., Web. 26 Mar. 2014. . Foster, Nigel G. Eu Law. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008) 322-323. Isin, Engin F. Enacting European Citizenship. (2013) 181. Lynch, David A. Trade and Globalization: An Introduction to Regional Trade Agreements. (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2010). N.p McCormick, John. Understanding the European Union: A Concise Introduction. (New York: St. Martins Press, 2011) 21. The EU Citizen Child and Non-EU National Parents: A Fundamental Right to Reside."Human Rights in Ireland. (N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Mar. 2014). Read More