¹ It is telling, in this respect, that the first ever edited volume on services in the internal market only appeared in 2001: see Andenas, M and Roth, WH (eds), Services and Free Movement in EU Law (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2001)Google Scholar.

² Case 33/74, Van Binsbergen [1974] ECR 1299; and Case C-76/90, Säger [1991] ECR I-4221.

³ This idea is developed in the following paragraphs. It has already been exposed in V Hatzopoulos, ‘Legal Aspects in Establishing the Internal Market for Services’, available at <http://www.coleurop.be/template.asp?pagename=lawpapers> accessed 19 August 2008; and in more detail by the same author in ‘Que reste-t-il de la directive sur les services? ‘ (2008) 3–4 Cahiers de Droit Européen 299. The same idea is shared by Barnard, C, ‘Unravelling the Services Directive’ (2008) 45 CML Rev 323 Google Scholar. The various aspects of the Services Directive have been analysed in detail by several authors; two edited volumes in English, one pre-dating and one post-dating the adoption of the Directive, bring together some of the most important ones; see Blanpain, R (ed), Freedom of Services in the EU, Labour and Social Security Law: The Bolkenstein Initiative (The Hague, Kluwer Law International, 2006)Google Scholar; and Neergaard, U, Nielsen, R and Roseberry, L (eds), The Services Directive, Consequences for the Welfare State and the European Social Model (Copenhagen, DJØF, 2008)Google Scholar.

⁴ For a more extensive and systematic presentation of the same case law, see Hatzopoulos, V and Do, U, ‘The Case Law of the ECJ Concerning the Free Provision of Services: 2000–2005’ (2006) 40 CML Rev 923 Google Scholar; the analysis here follows to some extent the structure of this earlier article, but is far more condensed.

⁵ For a brief but very accurate attempt to draw the relationships between the ECJ’s case law on services and the Directive, see J Snell, ‘Freedom to Provide Services in the Case Law and in the Services Directive: Problems, Solutions and Institutions’ in Neergaard et al, above n 3, 171–98.

⁶ Case C-384/93, Alpine Investments [1995] ECR I-1141, annotated by the present author in (1995) 29 CML Rev 1427.

⁷ K Coppenhole and W Devroe, (1995) Journal des Tribunaux Droit Communautaire 13; also W Devroe and J Wouters, (1996) Journal des Tribunaux Droit Communautaire 60. See, however, the present author’s annotation, above n 6, for a refutation of the critical position expressed by these authors.

⁸ Case C-60/00, Carpenter [2002] ECR I-6279, para 14.

⁹ Case C-36/02, Omega [2004] ECR I-9609. See also the annotation by Ackermann, (2005) 39 CML Rev 1107 Google Scholar.

¹⁰ Omega, above n 9, para 21.

¹¹ Council Regulation (EEC) 4055/86 of 22 December 1986, applying the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime transport between Member States and between Member States and third countries, [1986] OJ L378/1.

¹² Council Regulation (EEC) 2408/92 of 23 July 1992 on access for Community air carriers to intra-Community air routes, [1992] OJ L15/33.

¹³ For Regulation 4055/86 on maritime services, see Case C-381/93, Commission v France (Transport Services) [1994] ECR I-5145; for Regulation 2408/92 on air-transport, see Case C-70/99, Commission v Portugal (Airport Taxes) [2001] ECR I-4845.

¹⁴ Case C-295/00, Commission v Italy (Embarkation Tax) [2002] ECR I-1737.

¹⁵ Case C-430/99, Sea-Land [2002] ECR I-5235.

¹⁶ The same conclusion had already been reached in Commission v France (Transport Services), above n 13.

¹⁷ Case C-435/00, Geha Naftiliaki [2002] ECR I-10615.

¹⁸ Commission v Portugal (Airport Taxes), above n 13; Case C-447/99, Commission v Italy (Air Departure Tax) [2001] ECR I-5203; and Case C-92/01, Stylianakis [2003] ECR I-1291.

¹⁹ Case C-225/98, Commission v France (Nord Pas de Calais) [2000] ECR I-7445.

²⁰ Case C-324/98, Telaustria [2000] ECR I-745.

²¹ Case C-231/03, Coname [2005] ECR I-7287.

²² Case C-458/03, Parking Brixen [2005] ECR I-8612.

²³ Ibid, para 48.

²⁴ Case C-234/03, Contse [2005] ECR I-9315.

²⁵ Case 238/82, Duphar v Netherlands State [1984] ECR 523, para 16.

²⁶ Joined Cases C-159 & 160/91, Poucet and Pistre [1993] ECR I-637, para 6.

²⁷ See Case C-238/94, FFSA [1995] ECR I-4013; Case C-70/905, Sodemare [1997] ECR I-3395; Case C-67/96, Albany [1999] ECR I-5751; Joined Cases C-155 & 157/97, Brentjens [1999] ECR I-6025; and Case C-219/97, Drijvende [1999] ECR I-6121, respectively. On these three cases, see L Idot, ‘Droit Social et droit de la concurrence: confrontation ou cohabitation (A propos de quelques développements récents) ‘ (1999) Europe chron 11; Case C-218/00, Batistello [2002] ECR I-691; Case T-319/99, FENIN v Commission [2003] ECR II-357; Joined Cases C-264, 306, 354 & 355/01, AOK Bundesverband [2004] ECR I-2493.

²⁸ For a more detailed analysis of those criteria, see Hatzopoulos, V, ‘Health law and policy the impact of the EU’ in De Burca, G (ed), EU Law and the Welfare State: In Search of Solidarity (Oxford, Oxford University Press/EUI, 2005) 123–60Google Scholar.

²⁹ Case C-355/00, Freskot v Elliniko Dimosio [2003] ECR I-5263.

³⁰ Case C-136/00, Danner [2002] ECR I-8147.

³¹ Case C-422/01, Skandia [2003] ECR I-6817. Further for this case, see section II.B.ii below. A similar factual situation was present in the earlier Case C-302/98, Sehrer [2000] ECR I-4585, concerning sickness insurance contributions, but it was dealt with under the rules on establishment.

³² See Freskot, above n 29; Duphar, above n 25; and Poucet and Pistre, above n 26.

³³ See Hatzopoulos, V, ‘Killing national health and insurance systems but healing patients? The European market for health care services after the judgments of the ECJ in Vanbraekel and Peerbooms ’ (2002) 36 CML Rev 683 Google Scholar; and more recently ‘Health law and policy, the impact of the EU’, above n 28. See also G Davies, ‘Welfare as a service’ (2002) Legal Aspects of Economic Integration 27; P Cabral, ‘The Internal Market and the right to cross-border medical care’ (2004) EL Rev 673; and AP van der Mei, ‘Cross-border access to health care within the EU: Some reflections on Geraets-Smits and Peerbooms and Vanbraekel’ (2002) Medical Law 289 and ‘Cross-border access to medical care: Non-hospital care and waiting lists’ (2004) Legal Aspects of Economic Integration 57. More recently, see A Dawes, ‘Bonjour Herr Doctor: national healthcare systems, the Internal Market and cross-border medical care within the EU’ (2006) Legal Aspects of Economic Integration 167. For a full account of the relationships between EU and health law, see Hervey, T and McHale, J, Health Law and the European Union (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³⁴ In-patient treatment has been restrictively defined: see Case C-8/02, Leichtle [2004] ECR I-2641.

³⁵ For the objective assessment of the necessity of the treatment, independently from national preferences, see Case C-368/98, Vanbraekel [2001] ECR I-5363.

³⁶ Case C-385/99, Müller-Fauré [2003] ECR I-4509; and Case C-372/04, Watts [2006] ECR I-4325.

³⁷ The threefold classification which follows is simplistic, for the needs of demonstration, and does not account for the special characteristics of each one of the national systems.

³⁸ See Case C-158/96, Kohll [1998] ECR I-1931; Case C-56/01, Inizan [2003] ECR I-12403; and Case C-193/03, Bosch [2004] ECR I-9911.

³⁹ Case C-157/99, Smits and Peerbooms [2001] ECR I-5473; Vanbraekel, above n 35; and Müller-Fauré, above n 36.

⁴⁰ Watts, above n 36.

⁴¹ See amongst others: D Simon and F Lagondet, ‘Libre circulation des marchandises et situations purement internes: chronique d’une mort annoncée’ (1997) Europe chron 9; Tagaras, H, ‘Règles communautaires de libre circulation, discriminations à rebours et situations dites “purement internes”‘ in Mélanges en hommage à Michel Waelbroeck, vol II (Brussels, Bruylant, 1999) 1499 Google Scholar; R Papadopoulou, ‘Situations purement internes et droit communautaire: un instrument jurisprudentiel à double fonction ou une arme à double tranchant?’ (2001) Cahiers de Droit Européen 96; and Shuibhne, NN, ‘Free movement of persons and the wholly internal rule: time to move on?’ (2002) 38 CML Rev 731 Google Scholar.

⁴² Case C-363/93, Lancry [1994] ECR I-3957; and Joined Cases C-485 & 486/93, Simitzi v Kos [1995] ECR I-2665.

⁴³ Case C-448/98, Guimont [2000] ECR I-10663.

⁴⁴ Pistre, above n 26.

⁴⁵ Joined Cases C-515, 519–524 & 526–540/99, Reisch v Salzburg [2002] ECR I-2157; compare paras 24–7 of this judgment with paras 21–4 of Guimont, above n 43. See also Case C-300/01, Salzmann [2003] ECR I-4899.

⁴⁶ Case C-370/90, Surinder Singh [1992] ECR I-4265.

⁴⁷ Case C-281/98, Angonese [2000] ECR I-4139.

⁴⁸ Carpenter, above n 8, para 29. It is true that in Case C-134/03, Viacom Outdoor [2005] ECR I-1167, concerning a municipal tax imposed on billboard advertising, the Court declined the application of Art 49, but that was more because of the lack of any substantially restrictive effect the contested measure, rather than because of the lack of any trans-border element.

⁴⁹ Case C-405/98, Gourmet [2001] ECR I-1795.

⁵⁰ Ibid, para 39.

⁵¹ Case C-17/00, De Coster [2001] ECR I-9445, para 28; see also the note by P Wenneras, ‘The De Coster Case: Reflections on Tax and Proportionality’ (2002) Legal Issues of Economic Integration 219.

⁵² Joined Cases C-544 & 545/03, Mobistar and Belgacom [2005] ECR I-7723.

⁵³ Ibid, paras 32 and 33.

⁵⁴ This seems to constitute a shift from previous case law, in particular Case C-108/96, MacQuen [2001] ECR I-837.

⁵⁵ See section I.A.i.b above.

⁵⁶ Case C-243/89, Commission v Danemark, Storbaelt [1993] ECR I-3353.

⁵⁷ Ibid, para 33.

⁵⁸ Directive 95/46/EC of the Council of 24 October 1995, [1995] OJ L281/31.

⁵⁹ Joined Cases C-465/00 and 138 & 139/01, Österreichischer Rundfunk [2003] ECR I4989, para 42. See also JP Keppenne and S Van Raepenbusch, ‘Les principaux développements de la jurisprudence de la Cour de Justice et du Tribunal de Première Instance, Année 2003’ (2004) Cahiers de Droit Européen 439, who also make this point.

⁶⁰ See section I.A.i.c.

⁶¹ Case 263/86, Belgian State v Humbel [1988] ECR 5365, para 17.

⁶² Smits and Peerbooms, n 39 above, para 58.

⁶³ Which has already been accepted since Case 352/85, Bond van Adverteerders and others [1988] ECR 2085, para 16.

⁶⁴ Cited above, nn 30 and 31 respectively.

⁶⁵ Case 205/84, Commission v Germany (Insurance) [1986] ECR 3755.

⁶⁶ Case C-55/94, Gebhard [1995] ECR I-4165.

⁶⁷ Ibid, para 21.

⁶⁸ See Hatzopoulos, V, ‘Recent developments of the case law of the ECJ in the field of free of services 1994–1999’ (2000) 37 CML Rev 43, 45Google Scholar, where this restrictive approach of the Court was also criticised as being inappropriate in view of the current development and sophistication of services.

⁶⁹ Case C-215/01, Schnitzer [2003] ECR I-14847.

⁷⁰ Ibid, para 39.

⁷¹ Case C-171/02, Commission v Portugal (Private Security Firms) [2004] ECR I-5645.

⁷² See, eg Joined Cases C-369 & 376/96, Arblade and Leloup [1999] ECR I-8453.

⁷³ For which see section I.A.i.c above.

⁷⁴ De Coster, above n 51; Mobistar and Belgacom, above n 52; and Stylianakis, above n 18, respectively.

⁷⁵ Case C-452/04, Fidium Finanz [2006] ECR I-9521, para 32.

⁷⁶ See C Scott, ‘Services of General Interest in EC Law: Matching Values to Regulatory Technique in the Public and Private Sectors’ (2000) European Law Journal 310, 313.

⁷⁷ Poucet and Pistre, above n 26.

⁷⁸ Freskot, above n 29.

⁷⁹ Sodemare, above n 27. In the meantime some uncertainty had been created by the judgment of the Court in FFSA, above n 27.

⁸⁰ Case C-364/92, Eurocontrol [1994] ECR I-43.

⁸¹ Case C-343/95, Cali e Figli [1997] ECR I-1547.

⁸² Case 30/87, Bodson [1988] ECR 2479.

⁸³ See Danner and Skandia, above nn 30 and 31 respectively.

⁸⁴ See above section I.A.i.b.

⁸⁵ See above n 71.

⁸⁶ Discussed above at section I.A.ii.

⁸⁷ The ECJ has gone from deciding 40 cases in the five-year period between 1995 and 1999 to deciding over 140 cases based on Art 49 EC between 2000 and 2005; see Hatzopoulos and Do, above n 4.

⁸⁸ For the ‘bringing together’ of the four freedoms see, among many: Oliver, P and Roth, W, ‘The internal market and the four freedoms’ (2004) 41 CML Rev 407, 430 et seqGoogle Scholar; and Hatzopoulos, V, ‘Trente ans après les arrêts fondamentaux de 1974, les quatre libertés: quatre?’ in Demaret, P, Govaere, I and Hanf, D (eds), 30 Years of European Legal Studies at the College of Europe—30 ans d’études juridiques européennes au Collège d’Europe: Liber Professorum 1973/74–2003/04 (Brussels, P.I.E.-Peter Lang, 2005) 185 Google Scholar. See also A Caputi Jambrenghi and M Pullen, ‘The use of Articles 30 and 52 to attack barriers to market access: an overview of the ECJ’s case law’ (1996) European Competition Law Review 388; N Bernard, ‘La libre circulation des marchandises, des personnes et des services dans le traité CE sous l’angle de la compétence’ (1998) Cahiers de Droit Européen 11; Oliver, D, ‘Goods and services: two freedoms compared’ in Mélanges en hommage à Michel Waelbroeck , vol II (Brussels, Bruylant, 1999) 1377 Google Scholar; O’Leary, S, ‘The free movement of persons and services’ in Craig, P and de Bùrca, G (eds), The Evolution of EU Law (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1999) 377–416 Google Scholar; see also in Andenas and Roth (eds), above n 1, the extremely interesting contributions by M Poiares-Maduro, 41–68; J Snell and M Andenas, 69–140; H Jarass, 141–63; and JL Hansen, 197–210.

⁸⁹ See, among many cases, Alpine Investments, above n 6; and Gourmet, above n 49; and among the many commentators, A Biondi, ‘Advertising alcohol and the free movement principle: the Gourmet decision’ (2001) EL Rev 616; A Kaczorowska, ‘Gourmet can have his Keck and eat it!’ (2004) Europen Law Journal 479; and J Stuyck, ‘Gourmet: une nouvelle brèche dans la jurisprudence “Keck”? ‘ (2001) Cahiers de Droit Européen 683.

⁹⁰ See, eg De Coster and Wenneras, above n 51.

⁹¹ Mobistar and Belgacom, above n 52.

⁹² Ibid, para 31.

⁹³ For a brief comment of this distinction, see the author’s comment on Alpine Investments, above n 6.

⁹⁴ See already Hatzopoulos, n 68 above, 72. See also Hatzopoulos, V, ‘Exigences essentielles, impératives ou impérieuses: une théorie, des théories ou pas de théorie du tout?’ (1998) 2 Revue Trimestrielle de Droit Européen 191 Google Scholar; S O’Leary and JM Fernandez-Martin, ‘Judicially created exceptions to the free provision of services’ in Andenas and Roth (eds), n 1 above, 163–96.

⁹⁵ Case C-243/01, Gambelli [2003] ECR I-13031, para 60.

⁹⁶ Case C-262/02, Commission v France (Loi Evin) [2004] ECR I-6569, para 23. One should note, however, that this is not a consistent attitude of the Court, for in some recent judgments it follows a more ‘traditional’ analysis, clearly distinguishing between Art 56 exceptions and ‘overriding requirements’: see, eg Case C-341/05, Laval [2007] ECR I-11767.

⁹⁷ Above n 95.

⁹⁸ Joined Cases C-338, 359 & 360/04, Placanica [2007] ECR I-1891.

⁹⁹ Joined Cases C-49, 50, 52–54 & 68–71/98, Finalarte [2001] ECR I-7831, para 42.

¹⁰⁰ For more on this case and in general on the topic of posted workers, see below, at section II.B.ii.c.

¹⁰¹ Case C-320/91, Corbeau [1993] ECR I-2562; and Case C-393/92, Almelo [1994] ECR I-1477. See for these judgments A Wachsmann and F Berrod, ‘Les critères de justification des monopoles: un premier bilan après l’affaire Corbeau ‘ (1994) Revue Trimestrielle de Droit Européen 39. See also J Baquero Cruz, ‘Beyond competition: services of general economic interest and EC law’ in G De Burca (ed), n 28 above, 169–212.

¹⁰² Case C-147/97, Deutsche Post [2000] ECR I-825.

¹⁰³ Case C-475/99, Glöckner [2001] ECR I-8089.

¹⁰⁴ Case C-280/00, Altmark Trans [2003] ECR I-7747; see also O Dupéron, ‘Le régime des services publics en droit communautaire: des précisions apportées par la Cour de justice des Communautés européennes’ (2003) Petites affiches n° 229 6; JL Clergérie, ‘La légalité d’une contrepartie d’obligation de service public’ (2003) Dalloz Juridique 2814; M Merola and C Medina, ‘De l’arrêt Ferring à l’arrêt Altmark: continuité ou revirement dans l’approche du financement des services publics’ (2003) Cahiers de Droit Européen 639. On the basis of this judgment, the Commission has issued the so-called ‘Altmark Package’, also known as the ‘Monti-Kroes Package’, consisting of three texts: Directive 2005/81/EC modifying Directive 80/723/EEC on the transparency of financial relations between Member States and public undertakings, OJ [2005] L312/47; Decision 2005/842/EC, on the application of Art 86(2) of the EC Treaty to state aid in the form of public service compensation granted to certain undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest, OJ [2005] L312/67; and the ‘Community Framework for State aid in the form of public service compensation’ 2005/C, OJ [2005] C297/4.

¹⁰⁵ Case C-205/99, Analir [2001] ECR I-1271. See PJ Slot, (2003) CML Rev 159.

¹⁰⁶ Säger, above n 2, para 13.

¹⁰⁷ See Hatzopoulos, V, Le principe communautaire d’équivalence et de reconnaissance mutuelle dans la libre prestation de services (Athens/Brussels, Sakkoulas/Bruylant, 1999) 73–100 Google Scholar. For a different account, see Armstrong, K ‘Mutual Recognition’ in Barnard, C and Scott, J (eds), The Law of the Single European Market, Unpacking the Premises (Oxford, Hart, 2002) 225–67Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁸ Case C-263/99, Commission v Italy (Transport Consultants) [2001] ECR I-4195.

¹⁰⁹ Ibid, para 24.

¹¹⁰ Case C-279/00, Commission v Italy (Temporary Labour Agencies) [2002] ECR I-1425.

¹¹¹ Case C-358/98, Commission v Italy (Sanitation Services) [2000] ECR I-1255.

¹¹² Ibid, para 13.

¹¹³ Case C-189/03, Commission v The Netherlands (Private Security Firms) [2004] ECR I-9289.

¹¹⁴ Ibid, para 30.

¹¹⁵ This judgment is just one, albeit the most concise and clear, of a series of infringement cases concerning private security firms and decided by the Court upon quasi-identical facts: Case C-355/98, Commission v Belgium (Private Security Firms) [2000] ECR I-1221; Case C-283/99, Commission v Italy [2001] ECR I-4363; Case C-165/98, Mazzoleni [2001] ECR I-2189; and Commission v Portugal, above n 71.

¹¹⁶ See section I.C.i above.

¹¹⁷ Case C-326/00, Ioannidis v IKA [2003] ECR I-1703, and for a thorough presentation of this case the comment by the present author at (2003) CML Rev 1251.

¹¹⁸ Council Regulation (EEC) 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community. This Regulation has been modified at least 30 times, the last important modification extending its personal scope to cover nationals of non Member States legally residing within the EU, see Council Regulation (EC) 859/2003, [2003] OJ L124/1. It has recently been codified and repealed by Regulation (EC) 883/2004, [2004] OJ L166/1.

¹¹⁹ Ioannidis v IKA, above n 117, para 51.

¹²⁰ Case C-476/01, Kapper [2004] ECR I-5205.

¹²¹ Council Directive 91/439/EEC of 29 July 1991 on driving licences ([1991] OJ L237, 1), as amended by Council Directive 97/26/EC, [1997] OJ L150/41.

¹²² This case contains the bolder statement of the duty of cooperation between Member States fiscal authorities, but almost all recent tax cases follow the same logic.

¹²³ Council Directive 77/799/EEC of 19 December 1977 concerning mutual assistance by the competent authorities of the Member States in the field of direct taxation, [1977] OJ L336/15.

¹²⁴ The idea that the difference between the case law on mutual recognition, on the one hand, and the (abandoned) country of origin principle (CoOP), on the other, is merely a question of burden of proof is more fully developed by the present author in ‘Que reste-t-il de la directive sur les services’, above n 3, 317; see also Barnard above n 3, 363.

¹²⁵ Directive 2006/123 of the EP and the Council, of 12 December 2006, [2006] OJ L376/36.

¹²⁶ COM(2004)2 final, 13 January 2004.

¹²⁷ See O de Schutter and S Francq, ‘La proposition de directive relative aux services dans le marché intérieur: reconnaissance mutuelle, harmonisation et conflits des lois dans l’Europe élargie’ (2005) Cahiers de Droit Européen 603, 640.

¹²⁸ See M Audit, ‘Régulation du marché intérieur et libre circulation des lois’ (2006) Journal des Tribunaux Droit International 1333.

¹²⁹ See, for a brief presentation of this idea with further bibliographic references, Wilderspin, M, ‘Que reste-t-il du principe du pays d’origine? Le regard des internationalistes’ (2007) 6 Europe 26 Google Scholar.

¹³⁰ See MD Garabiol-Furet, ‘La directive Bolkenstein, bouc émissaire d’une Europe incertaine’ (2005) Révue du Marché Unique Européen 295, 295; see also P Pellegrino, ‘Directive sur les services dans le marché intérieur, Un accouchement dans la douleur’ (2007) Révue du Marché Unique Européen 14, 17.

¹³¹ See de Schutter and Francq, above n 127, 606; and S Micossi, ‘Fixing the Services Directive’ CEPS Policy Brief 100/2006, 7.

¹³² B de Witte, Setting the Scene: How did Services get to Bolkenstein and Why? EUI working papers, Law 2007/70, available at <http://cadmus.iue.it/dspace/bitstream/1814/6929/1/LAW_2007_20.pdf> accessed 19 August 2008.

¹³³ See Wilderspin, above n 129; Micossi above n 131; and the House of Lords, Completing the Internal Market in Service: Report with Evidence, Sixth Report of Session 2005–6, 63–74.

¹³⁴ See Pellegrino, above n 130, 18; see also Kleiner, C, ‘La conception des règles de droit international privé dans la directive services’ (2007) 6 Europe 48 Google Scholar.

¹³⁵ Van Binsbergen, above n 2; and Case 120/78, Rewe-Zentral AG v Bundesmonopolverwaltung für Branntwein (Cassis de Dijon) [1979] ECR 649. See, eg R Graham, ‘Mutual Recognition and Country of Origin in the Case Law of the ECJ’ in R Blanpain, Freedom of Services in the EU, above n 3, 37.

¹³⁶ [1980] OJ C256/2.

¹³⁷ Ever since Case 25/88, Bouchara [1989] ECR 1105.

¹³⁸ This has been a more complicated process, for which see Hatzopoulos, above n 107, 116 et seq.

¹³⁹ It is true that in practice such a distinction is not always easy to draw, see, eg Case C-347/02, Commission v France (Insurance) [2004] ECR I-7557.

¹⁴⁰ For a more detailed account of the ‘passport’ system, see E Lomnicka, ‘The Home Country Control Principle in the Financial Services Directives and the Case Law’ (2000) European Business Law Review 324 and Hatzopoulos, above n 107, 413.

¹⁴¹ Directive 97/36/EC of the EP and the Council of 30 June 1997 modifying Directive 89/552/CEE on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by Law, Regulation or Administrative Action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities, [1997] OJ L202/60.

¹⁴² Directive 1999/93/EC of the EP and the Council of 13 December 1999, on a Community framework for electronic signatures, [2000] OJ L13/12.

¹⁴³ Directive 2000/31/EC of the EP and the Council of 8 June 2000, on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (‘Directive on Electronic Commerce’), [2000] OJ L178/1.

¹⁴⁴ Directive 2002/58/EC of the EP and the Council of 12 July 2002, for data protection in electronic communications [2002] OJ L201/37; this Directive replaces Directive 97/66/EC.

¹⁴⁵ Eg TV without Frontiers Directive, Art 2a para 1.

¹⁴⁶ COM(2005)483 final/2, 23 November 2005, Art 21(2).

¹⁴⁷ For the harmonisation put forward by the Directive, see below section II.C.i.b.

¹⁴⁸ Which, however, could have been dealt with through the imposition of compulsory (contractual) clauses protecting consumers, by, eg making the consumers’ direct contractor fully and exclusively responsible to them.

¹⁴⁹ For these see below at section II.C.

¹⁵⁰ Directive 77/799/EEC of the Council of 19 December 1977, concerning mutual assistance by the competent authorities of the Member States in the field of direct taxation, [1977] OJ L336/15.

¹⁵¹ See Ioannidis v IKA and Danner, above nn 117 and 30 respectively.

¹⁵² Rome Convention of 1980, [1998] OJ 27/34, Art 4.

¹⁵³ Regulation (EC) 44/2001 of the Council of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, [2001] OJ L12/1, Art 5(1)b.

¹⁵⁴ See House of Lords, above n 133.

¹⁵⁵ For this idea of ‘passing the buck’, see, among many: Audit, above n 128, 1353 et seq; and de Schutter and Francq, above n 127, 640 et seq.

¹⁵⁶ See, eg the British House of Lords, in the report cited above n 133, which clearly values the development of commercial transactions, in particular by small and medium enterprises, while it passes in silence the negative consequences for consumers.

¹⁵⁷ Concerning the issue of regulatory competition, see, among many, Audit, above n 128; V Mayer-Schönberger and A Somek, ‘Introduction: Governing Regulatory Interaction: the Normative Question’ (2006) European Law Journal 431; P Zumbansen, ‘Spaces and Places: A Systems Theory Approach to Regulatory Competition in European Company Law’ (2006) European Law Journal 534; and in a more general way, C Barnard and S Deakin, ‘Market Access and Regulatory Competition’, Jean Monnet Working Paper no 9/2001, available at <http://www.jeanmonnetprogram.org/papers/01/012701.html> accessed 19 August 2008, as well as F Scharpf, ‘Introduction: The Problem Solving Capacity of Multi-level Governance’ (1997) Journal of Euroean Public Policy 520.

¹⁵⁸ In this sense, see S Collignon in his oral presentation in the CEPS (Centro de Estudios Politicas y Constitucionales) commemorative conference for the 50 years of the Treaty of Rome, ‘Together Since 1957: From Rome to Berlin’, Madrid, 19–20 June 2007.

¹⁵⁹ See above section I.C.

¹⁶⁰ P Manin, ‘Conclusions’ on Directive 2006/123/EC (2007) 6 Europe 29, 29.

¹⁶¹ It is worth noting that in the French version of the text, para 6 of the said provision introduces a third variation, according to which the Directive ‘does not apply’ to labour law, etc, while the English version sticks to the terms ‘does not affect’.

¹⁶² Taxation, an entire sector (which should have been moved to Art 1 after its modification by the EP) is also excluded from the scope of the Directive by virtue of Art 2.

¹⁶³ This view seems to be confirmed if we compare the text finally adopted with the one proposed, which only contained three exceptions.

¹⁶⁴ Directive 96/71/EC of the EP and the Council, of 16 December 1996, concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services, [1997] OJ L18/1.

¹⁶⁵ Directive 89/552/EEC of the Council of 3 October 1989, on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by Law, Regulation or Administrative Action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities, [1989] OJ L298/23.

¹⁶⁶ Directive 2005/36/EC of the EP and the Council of 7 September 2005, on the recognition of professional qualifications, [2005] OJ L255/22.

¹⁶⁷ Regulation 1408/71/EEC of the Council of 14 June 1971, on the application of social security schemes to employed persons and their families moving within the Community, [1971] OJ L149/2.

¹⁶⁸ It is worth noting that the ‘public policy’ ground seems much more comprehensive in the English text than in the French where reference is made to ‘ordre public’.

¹⁶⁹ It is difficult to understand why the EP insisted on both provisions being inserted to Art 16, since they seem to set the same rule and create confusion. The view that paras 1 and 3 of Art 16 of the Directive stand for the same rule is confirmed by the Commission’s ‘Handbook on the Implementation of the Services Directive’, published in Oct 2007, 48, where the two provisions are dealt with indistinctively together; this Handbook is available online at <http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/index_en.htm> accessed 19 August 2008.

¹⁷⁰ It is true that Art 16 purports to reduce the reasons of exceptions to the ‘free provision’ principle by limiting them to only four: public order, public security, public health and the protection of the environment. Given, however, that neither Art 16 nor the Directive in general put in place a harmonised level of protection of all the other ‘overriding reasons’ of general interest, it is difficult to understand how a clause in a Directive could limit the grounds for exceptions which are supposed to stem directly from the Treaty; this argument is spelled out more in detail in Hatzopoulos, above n 3, 321–2.

¹⁷¹ On the relationship between Treaty-based and judge-made exceptions, see V Hatzopoulos, ‘Exigences essentielles, impératives ou impérieuses: une théorie, des théories ou pas de théorie du tout?’ (1998) Révue Trimestrielle de Droit Européen 191.

¹⁷² See also Lemaire, C, ‘La directive, la liberté d’établissement et la libre prestation de services. Confirmations, innovations’ (2007) 2 Europe 15, 21Google Scholar; also Snell, above n 5. See contra, however, E Bergamini, ‘Freedom of Establishment under the Services Directive’ in Neegrad et al (eds), above n 3, 149–69, 165, as well as the Commission’s Handbook, above n 169, 49 (text accompanying fn 107), where it is stated that the enumeration of reasons for exceptions in Art 16 ‘excludes Member States from invoking other public interest objectives’.

¹⁷³ COM(2004)374 final, 12 May 2004.

¹⁷⁴ See for an exhaustive discussion on this topic, Dony, M, ‘Les notions de service d’intérêt général et service d’intérêt économique général’ in Louis, JV and Rodriguez, S, Les services d’intérêt économique général et l’UE (Brussels, Bruylant, 2006) 3–38 Google Scholar.

¹⁷⁵ Humbel, above n 61; Case C-109/92 Wirth [1993] ECR I-6447; and more recently Freskot, above n 29. See also the analysis above section I.A.ii.

¹⁷⁶ See above section I.A.ii.

¹⁷⁷ For an overview of the relevant case law, see Hatzopoulos and Do, above n 4, 934–7.

¹⁷⁸ BJ Drijber, ‘Les services d’intérêt économique général et la libre prestation des services’ in Louis and Rodriguez, above n 174, 89 rightly observes that the Court’s case law is not always clear on qualifying whether any given service of general interest is economic in nature. Therefore, the clear distinction drawn by the Directive may, in practice, be blurred and services of general non-economic interest may also be affected by the Directive rules, despite their formal exclusion from its scope.

¹⁷⁹ This is also a modification wanted by the EP: while the initial version of Art 17 only excluded from the CoOP an exhaustive list of five services of general economic interest, in the current version all such services are excluded and the list contained in Art 17(1) has only indicative value.

¹⁸⁰ For which see below section II.C.

¹⁸¹ See above section I.B.iii.

¹⁸² The Court itself has stressed how important cooperation is in the field of healthcare: see, eg Ioannidis v IKA, above n 117.

¹⁸³ For which see below section II.C.i.a.

¹⁸⁴ See, eg Case C-444/05, Stamatelaki [2007] ECR I-3185, which concerned an absolute prohibition of receiving healthcare services in another Member State, clearly contrary to the well-established case law of the Court.

¹⁸⁵ For the reasons which motivated the EP’s position, see one of the reports submitted to it, by R Baeten, ‘The Proposal for a Directive on Services in the Internal Market applied to Healthcare Services’ presented at the EP’s public audience of 11 November 2004, available at <http://www.europarl.europa.eu/hearings/20041111/imco/baeten_en.pdf> accessed 19 August 2008.

¹⁸⁶ Report A6-0173/2007 FINAL, of 10 May 2007, on the impact and consequences of the exclusion of health services from the Directive on services in the internal market, Rapporteur B Vergnaud, para 71.

¹⁸⁷ COM (2008) 414 final, 2 July 2008.

¹⁸⁸ Case C-275/92, Schindler [1994] ECR I-1039, Läärä [1999] ECR I-6067; and Case C-67/98, Zenatti [1999] ECR I-7289; Case C-6/01, Anomar [2003] ECR I-8621; see for these cases Allen, B, ‘Ladies and Gentlemen, no more bets please’ (2000) 27 Legal Issues of Economic Integration 201–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁸⁹ See the comment on Schindler by Hatzopoulos, V, (1995) 33 CML Rev 841 Google Scholar and on Zenatti and Läärä by Straetmans, G, (2000) 37 CML Rev 991 Google Scholar. In general for the restricted control exercised by the Court in fields touching on public morality, see P Hetsch, ‘Émergence de valeurs morales dans la jurisprudence de la CJCE’ (1982) Révue Trimestrielle de Droit Européen 511.

¹⁹⁰ Gambelli, above n 95, para 63; and Placanica, above n 98, para 47.

¹⁹¹ Gambelli, para 67.

¹⁹² Placanica, para 63.

¹⁹³ Ibid.

¹⁹⁴ Case C-42/02, Lindman [2003] ECR I-13519.

¹⁹⁵ This case law should be seen in parallel with the WTO Appellate Body Report in United States—Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services (‘USGambling’), WT/DS285/AB/R, 7 April 2005, para 373. See also F Ortino, ‘Treaty interpretation and the WTO Appellate Body Report in US-Gambling: A critique’ (2006) Journal of International and European Law 117.

¹⁹⁶ Directive 2006/123, Art 2(2)h.

¹⁹⁷ See, amongst others, Commission v France (Nord Pas de Calais), above n 19; and, in a more explicit way, Coname, above n 21; and Parking Brixen, above n 22.

¹⁹⁸ See above n 115: Commission v Belgium (Private Security Firms); Commission v Italy; and Mazzoleni. See also Case C-171/02, Commission v Portugal [2004] ECR I-5645; and Case C-189/03, Commission v Netherlands [2004] ECR I-9289.

¹⁹⁹ Commission v Italy, above n 198.

²⁰⁰ The same requirements are to be found in almost all the cases; see in particular Commission v Portugal, Commission v The Netherlands and Mazzoleni, above n 115.

²⁰¹ Joined Cases 62 & 63/81, Seco v EVI [1982] ECR 223; Case C-43/93, Van der Elst [1994] ECR I-3803; and Case C-113/89, Rush Portuguesa, [1990] ECR I-1417.

²⁰² For the importance of agreements on minimum wages as a means to combat poverty, see L Funk and H Lesch, ‘Minimum Wage Regulations in Selected European Countries’ (2006) Intereconomics 78, 89.

²⁰³ Micossi in ‘Fixing the Services Directive’, above n 131, 6 identifies these two fields where the host state rules do not apply. Both exclusions are, however, understandable. Hiring conditions are those applicable in the home state—this could not be differently. Concerning social security, Art 13 of Regulation 1408/71 already foresees that all activities the duration of which exceeds 12 months are fully subject to the host state rules.

²⁰⁴ Commission Report on the application of Directive 96/71/EC, January 2003; and Communication ‘The application of Directive 96/71/EC in the Member States’, COM(2003)458 fi nal, 25 July 2003.

²⁰⁵ This second provision was directly inspired from the abandoned draft Directive extending the freedom to provide cross-border services to third-country nationals established within the Community, COM(2000)271 final, 8 May 2000, finally withdrawn by COM(2004)542 final, 1 October 2004.

²⁰⁶ For a more detailed account of the effects that the relevant provisions of the draft Directive could have had on posted workers, see N Bruun, ‘The Proposed Directive on Services and Labour Law’ in Blanpain (ed), above n 3, 19–36; and A Neal, ‘The Country of Origin Principle and Labour Law in the Framework of the European Social Model’ in the same edited volume, 51–72. Some authors have gone as far as to suggest that ‘the Commission introduces the CoOP in the administrative modalities for controlling the application of labour law’, an idea which seems quite exaggerated; see Driguez, L, ‘Le détachement des travailleurs après la directive sur les services’ (2007) 6 Europe 35, 36 in fine (translated from the French by the present author)Google Scholar.

²⁰⁷ Arblade and Leloup, above n 72.

²⁰⁸ Ibid.

²⁰⁹ Case C-445/03, Commission v Luxembourg [2004] ECR I-10191, paras 20–1.

²¹⁰ Case C-244/04, Commission v Germany [2006] ECR I-885.

²¹¹ Case C-58/98, Corsten [2000] ECR I-7919, para 47; and Schnitzer, above n 69, para 37.

²¹² Ibid, para 37.

²¹³ Mazzoleni, above n 115.

²¹⁴ Ibid, para 30.

²¹⁵ Ibid, para 35.

²¹⁶ Ibid, para 36.

²¹⁷ Case C-164/99, Portugaia Construções [2002] ECR I-787.

²¹⁸ Ibid, para 29.

²¹⁹ This is a peculiar proportionality test: usually the restrictive measure is appraised as against a less restrictive one, while here the competing interests themselves are being compared.

²²⁰ Finalarte, above n 99.

²²¹ Laval, above n 96; Case C-438/05, Viking, judgment of 11 December 2007; and Case C-346/06, Rüffert, judgment of 3 April 2008. All of these cases were delivered after the present article was written and are presented in other parts of this volume: therefore, despite their importance, they are not analysed in the present article.

²²² See above n 206.

²²³ The view adopted here is deliberately simplistic. For detailed—if not overstretched—analyses of the risks that the proposed Directive represented for labour law and labour relations in the Member States, see F Hendrickx, ‘The Services Directive and Social Dumping: National Labour Law under Strain?’ in Neegraard et al (eds), above n 3, 243; by the same author ‘Monitoring of Labour Standards in Case of Posting: Some Troublesome Issues under the Proposed Services Directive’ in Blanpain (ed), above n 3, 105–14; and, in the same edited volume, M Colucci, ‘Surveillance and Control of Labour Standards at EU Level’, 115–26; and C Passchier, ‘The point of View of the ETUC’, 141–52.

²²⁴ COM(2006)159 final, 4 April 2006 and, of the same date, SEC(2006)439.

²²⁵ See above section I.A.iii.

²²⁶ Case C-456/02, Trojani [2004] ECR I-7573; Case C-138/02 Collins [2004] ECR I-2703; and Case C-209/03 Bidar [2005] ECR I-2119. See in general on the ‘social sensibility’ of the ECJ, Hatzopoulos, V, ‘A (more) social Europe: A political crossroad or a legal one-way? Dialogues between Luxembourg and Lisbon’ (2005) 42 CML Rev 1599 Google Scholar.

²²⁷ Directive 85/577/EEC of the Council of 20 December 1985, to protect the consumer in respect of contracts negotiated away from business premises, [1985] OJ L372/31; Directive 97/7/EC of the EP and the Council of 20 May 1997 on the protection of consumers in respect of distance contracts, [1997] OJ L144/19, as modified by Directives 2002/65/EC and 2005/29/EC.

²²⁸ Exceptions necessary to accommodate the case law of the Court in cases such as Gebhard, above n 66, and, more importantly, Case C-309/99, Wouters [2002] ECR I-1577.

²²⁹ This will be further discussed below in section II.C.ii.

²³⁰ See among many, Snyder, F, ‘Soft law and Institutional practice in the EC’ in Martin, S (ed), The Construction of Europe, Essays in Honour of Emile Noel (Dordrecht, Kluwer, 1994) 197 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; more recently, D Trubek, P Cortell and M Nance, ‘Soft Law, Hard law and European Integration: Toward a Theory of Hybridity’ (2/05) Jean Monnet Working Paper; and, in a more exhaustive way, Senden, L, Soft Law in EC Law (Ofxord/Portland, Hart, 2004)Google Scholar.

²³¹ COM(1997)626 final, 26 November 1997; see also the Commission’s webpage on this issue at <http://ec.europa.eu/governance/better_regulation/impact_en.htm> accessed 19 August 2008.

²³² COM(2001)428 final, 25 July 2001.

²³³ Several general reports, as well as national reports, are available at <http://www.oecd.org/topic/0,3373,en_2649_37421_1_1_1_1_37421,00.html> accessed 19 August 2008.

²³⁴ The Commission pursues administrative simplification not only at the Member States level, but also concerning its own legislative acts and proposals, see Commission Communication ‘Implementing the Community Lisbon programme: A strategy for the simplification of the regulatory environment’ COM(2005)535 final, 25 October 2005, and the first Report on the application of this strategy, COM(2006)690 final, 14 November 2006.

²³⁵ COM(2007)23 final, 24 January 2007.

²³⁶ For the issue of hybrid formations, see above n 230.

²³⁷ See Barnard, above n 3, 324–6.

²³⁸ To use Barnard’s expression, ‘[d]irectives drafted by tired politicians in the middle of the night rarely stand up to the harsh light of day’: ibid, 325.