Säger v Dennemeyer & Co Ltd
The freedom to provide services requires the abolition of any restriction, even if it applies without distinction to national providers, which is liable to prohibit or otherwise impede the activities of a provider established in another Member State.
Facts
Dennemeyer, a company established in the United Kingdom, provided a service of monitoring patents and paying renewal fees for patent holders in Germany. Under German law, only patent agents with a special licence could provide services relating to patents. Mr Säger, a German patent agent, sued Dennemeyer, arguing that it was breaching the German law.
Legal principle
The Court of Justice held that the German law was contrary to the freedom to provide services. Article 56 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union requires not only the elimination of all discrimination against a person providing services on the ground of his nationality, but also the abolition of any restriction, even if it applies without distinction to national providers of services and to those of other Member States, when it is liable to prohibit or otherwise impede the activities of a provider of services established in another Member State where he lawfully provides similar services. The restriction could not be justified, because the service was simple and did not require the special qualifications of a patent agent.
Related cases on freedom of establishment and services
- Alpine Investments BV v Minister van Financiën Case C-384/93, [1995] ECR I-1141
- Carpenter v Secretary of State for the Home Department Case C-60/00, [2002] ECR I-6279
- Cartesio Oktató és Szolgáltató bt Case C-210/06, [2008] ECR I-9641
- Centros Ltd v Erhvervs og Selskabsstyrelsen Case C-212/97, [1999] ECR I-1459
- Gebhard v Consiglio dell'Ordine degli Avvocati e Procuratori di Milano Case C-55/94, [1995] ECR I-4165
- HM Customs and Excise v Schindler Case C-275/92, [1994] ECR I-1039
- International Transport Workers' Federation v Viking Line ABP Case C-438/05, [2007] ECR I-10779
- Kamer van Koophandel en Fabrieken voor Amsterdam v Inspire Art Ltd Case C-167/01, [2003] ECR I-10155
Studying EU Law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
