Substantive EU Law-Free Movement of Goods and Parallel Imports Essay

Substantive EU Law-Free Movement of Goods and Parallel Imports - Essay Example As a result, EU states will not impose any trade restriction on member states in relation to imports and exports of goods (Dedman 2010). Even after fifty years, the objectives of EU have not been achieved. The free movement of goods within the EU is still a complicated perspective. There are various hurdles which impede the free movement of goods in the European Union. The main hurdle among them is interpretating general provision of the technical barriers under Article 28 and 29 by the European Court of Justice (the ECJ). Another hurdle is related to the exceptions to the general provisions of Article 28 and 29 that is based on Article 30 and the mandatory requirements of Cassis de Dijon which is arising from the ECJ (Lelieveldt and Princen 2011). Furthermore, parallel import is one of the major phenomena in the international trade because on one hand, it follows market laws strictly and on the other, it is not completely controlled by the law. The dilemma is that producers want to maintain a difference in the prices of goods among different countries, whereas consumers want to pay same price. Here, parallel import can be defined as goods which are produced and sold legally and then exported. There is nothing illegal about the parallel imported goods but as native entrepreneurs sell same goods at higher price, they don’t like this completion. ... free movement of goods, services, capital and people. EU’s internal market is very favorable to increased competition, larger economies of scales and increased specialisation, hence factors of production and goods are freely moved in areas where they are highly valued. Free Movement of Goods One of the major principles of the European Union’s internal market is free movement of goods. This principle deals with removal of national barriers to the free movement of goods within EU. In various fields, such barriers have been removed through harmonisation, like medical devices, vehicles, gas appliances, pharmaceuticals, metrology, chemicals, electrical equipments, construction products, toys, textiles, pressure equipments, footwear, and cosmetics. Excluding special circumstances, harmonisation of legislation and provisions of Articles 28 and 29 of the EC treaty control the member states in relation to imposing intra-community trade barriers. These articles can exercise direc t effect and applied by national courts (Pitiyasak 2010). Mutual recognition principle also leads its way through these provisions. It implies that if the sector is non-harmonised then goods which are legally marketed and accepted in another member state must be accepted by every member state. The application of this principle can only be challenged in some exceptional cases, like environmental issue, health and public safety. In such cases, even the derogatory measures are considered to control the free movement of goods (Andenas and Roth 2002). All measures along with Article 28 and Article 29 are having equivalent effect between the member states in relation to imposing quantitative restrictions on imports, exports and