Procureur du Roi v Dassonville

The Dassonville decision of the European Court of Justice ( ECJ Case 8/74 Prosecutor / Benoit and Gustave Dassonville judgment dated July 11, 1974, ECR 1974, 837 ) belongs together with the Keck decision ( ECJ Case C- 267 and 268/91, Judgement of 24 November 1993 ECR 1993, I- 6097 ) and the Cassis de Dijon decision ( ECJ Case 120/78, judgment dated February 20, 1979, ECR 1979, 649 ) to the leading decisions with regard to the free movement of goods within the internal market.

The Union law protects using the Article 3, Section 1, Article 28 et seq. TFEU ​​(formerly known as Community law in Article 3, paragraph 1 lit. A, Article 23 et seq. ECT) the free movement of goods, which is one of the four fundamental freedoms. In some cases, however, the Member States are still trying to protect or not completely release their markets. Instead of quantitative restrictions (quotas ), these are often measures which, although even no quotas, but to develop the same effect and thus also protect the domestic market. Herewith the Article 34 and 35 TFEU deal (formerly Articles 28 and 29 EC Treaty), prescribe a " prohibition of quantitative restrictions and measures having equivalent effect " for the import and export of goods. In the Dassonville decision of the ECJ has defined in detail, what actions fall under Articles 34 and 35 TFEU:

" All trading rules enacted by Member States which are capable of hindering intra-Community trade, directly or indirectly, actually or potentially, can be regarded as a measure having equivalent effect to a quantitative restriction. "

The ECJ is based on this formula only to objective characteristics, as the evidence of protectionist intent would be just like the actual effect of the measures is difficult to perform. The definition does not significantly further than that of the Commission, for five years prior to the decision ( 70/50/EEC of 22 December 1969 (OJ 1970 L 013/0029-0031, Sartorius II No. 175) ), since now already alone the possibility an interaction between the state and measure trade flows sufficient - and this is almost always the case. His sentence was later limited by the Cassis formula, which provides further justification options for the State concerned.