Article 49 TFEU is intended to ensure that all nationals of Member States who establish themselves in another Member State, even if that establishment is only secondary, for the purpose of pursuing activities as self-employed persons, receive the same treatment as nationals of that State.

Since the registered office of companies serves as the connecting factor with the legal system of a State, like nationality in the case of natural persons, a Member State in which a company seeks to establish itself cannot apply to it a different treatment solely by reason of the fact that its registered office is situated in another Member State.

The tax legislation of a Member State which differs in treatment according to whether branches and agencies are dependent on companies having their registered office in its territory or in another Member State, is contrary to Article 49 TFEU.

Article 49 TFEU expressly leaves traders free to choose the appropriate legal form in which to pursue their activities in another Member State and that freedom of choice must not be limited by discriminatory tax provisions.

CJEC, January 28, 1986, No 270-83

A Member State may prevent the marketing in its territory of dangerous machines which have not been proved to afford users the same level of protection as that which the national rules are intended to ensure or establish.

CJEC, January 28, 1986, No 188-84

La législation fiscale d'un Etat membre qui applique un traitement différent selon que les succursales et agences dépendent de sociétés ayant leur siège social sur son territoire ou dans un autre Etat membre, est contraire à l'article 49 TFUE.

Le siège des sociétés servant à déterminer, à l'instar de la nationalité de personnes physiques, leur rattachement à l'ordre juridique d'un Etat, un Etat membre d'établissement ne peut appliquer un traitement différent à une société du seul fait que son siège est situé dans un autre Etat membre.

L'article 49 TFUE laisse expressément aux opérateurs économiques la possibilité de choisir la forme juridique appropriée pour l'exercice de leurs activités dans un autre Etat membre, libre choix qui ne doit pas être limité par des dispositions fiscales discriminatoires.

L'article 49 TFUE vise à assurer le bénéfice du traitement national à tout ressortissant d'un Etat membre qui s'établit, ne serait-ce qu'à titre secondaire, dans un autre Etat membre pour y exercer une activité non salariée.

CJCE, 28 janvier 1986, n° 270-83

Un Etat membre peut empêcher la commercialisation sur son territoire de machines dangereuses qui ne garantissent pas un niveau de protection aux utilisateurs équivalent à celui que sa réglementation nationale entend assurer.

CJCE, 28 janvier 1986, n° 188-84

Competing undertakings of the recipient of State aid may challenge a decision of compatibility with the internal market handed down by the Commission if the aid measure substantially affects their position on the market and if they participated in the procedure before the Commission by means of a complaint or the submission of comments.

CJEC, January 28, 1986, No 169-84

Provisions for the sharing of markets between franchisor and franchisees, or between franchisees, affect trade between Member States, even if they only involve undertakings established in the same country, because they prevent franchisees from establishing themselves in another Member State.

Market-sharing agreements between franchisor and franchisees or between franchisees affect trade between Member States, even if they only involve undertakings established in the same country, because they prevent franchisees from establishing themselves in another Member State.

Minimum or imposed prices set out by a franchisor, are particularly serious anticompetitive practices that cannot benefit from the block exemption.

Clauses that restrict cross-supplies within a franchise network are particularly serious anticompetitive practices that cannot benefit from the block exemption.

Clauses in a franchise distribution agreement, which are essential to preventing the risk of transferred know-how or assistance to competitors, do not restrict competition.

The exclusive supply clauses within a network imposed on a franchisee are lawful, when it is impossible to lay down objective quality specifications or control their application.

A provision requiring the franchisee to obtain the franchisor's approval for all advertising is lawful as long as that provision concerns only the nature of the advertising.

Provisions of a distribution franchise contract necessary for the protection of the know-how provided or the network's reputation do not restrict competition.

The provisions of a franchise distribution agreement necessary for the protection of the know-how provided or the network's identity and reputation do not restrict competition.      

CJEC, January 28, 1986, No 161-84

Les entreprises concurrentes du bénéficiaire d'une aide d'Etat sont recevables à agir à l'encontre de la décision de compatibilité avec le marché intérieur prononcée par la Commission, si la mesure d'aide affecte substantiellement leur position sur le marché et si elles ont participé à la procédure devant la Commission par le biais d'une plainte ou d'observations.

CJCE, 28 janvier 1986, n° 169-84

Cass. crim., 27 janvier 1986, n° 84-95.750

Cass. 1re civ., 26 janvier 1986, n° 82-10.257

A Member State which, after expiry of the period prescribed for recovering aid, confines itself in contesting the accuracy of the reasons recited by the Commission decision to pleading that it is impossible to withdraw aid because of provisions of national law and to requesting that the Commission clarify what it means by "withdrawal of the aid", fails to comply with its duty of genuine cooperation.

CJEC, January 15, 1986, No 52-84

Un Etat membre qui, après l'expiration du délai d'exécution imparti pour la récupération d'une aide, se borne à contester l'exactitude de la motivation de la décision de la Commission, à invoquer l'impossibilité de supprimer l'aide à cause des dispositions du droit national et à demander à la Commission ce qu'elle entend par "suppression de l'aide", manque à son devoir de coopération loyale.

CJCE, 15 janvier 1986, n° 52-84

Les sommes perçues par le concessionnaire de droits communaux au titre de prestations accessoires aux droits de place et de stationnement doivent faire l'objet d'une facturation.

Court decisions rendered in 1986 - Page 12