Free Movement of Persons in the EU v. in the EEA: Of Effect-Related Homogeneity and a Reversed Polydor Principle

When the EEA Agreement was concluded in the early 1990s, it reflected, in the fields covered, the state of the then Community law, also with respect to the free movement of persons. Since then, both EEA and EU law have developed further, though with certain marked differences. Notably, the EU Treaty revision of Maastricht led to the introduction of Union citizenship. The fact that there is no corresponding concept in the EEA Agreement led to certain challenges within the EEA with respect to the free movement of persons, due notably to the double nature of Directive 2004/38 as a further development of the free movement law of the Communities and a Union citizenship instrument. Today, the EEA and the EU rules are identical with respect to the market access rights of economic agents. In contrast, it is debated whether and to what extent the incorporation of Directive 2004/38 into the EEA legal system is indeed limited for those purposes. This relates in particular to case law of the EFTA Court on persons who are not economically active, where the Court, in the EEA context, gives Directive 2004/38 a broader interpretation than the CJEU does in the EU context. The EFTA Court's aim, despite the lack of Union citizenship in EEA law, is to arrive at the same level of protection. Commentators speak about a particular understanding of homogeneity and of the Polydor principle. This approach raises questions also with respect to the external relations of the EU with other non-Member States, including notably the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland following its withdrawal from EU membership ("Brexit")

Homogenität im Rechtsbestand der Schengen- und Dublin-Abkommen: Übernimmt die Schweiz im Assoziationsrahmen nicht notifiziertes Asyl- und Datenschutzrecht der EU?

The Schengen and Dublin association agreements between Switzerland and the EU provide for a system of continuing updating, in order to achieve the homogeneity of the law of the agreements with the EU law from which they are derived. This contribution argues that, within this association framework, Switzerland is only bound by new EU law that falls within the field of application of the two agreements, was notified to Switzerland and has been formally adopted by Switzerland into the association acquis

Tobler/Beglinger-Brevier zum Institutionellen Abkommen Schweiz-EU

Die Schweiz und die Europäische Union (EU) verhandeln seit dem Frühling 2014 über ein institutionelles Abkommen“ zu wichtigen Teilen des bilateralen Rechts. Man spricht auch von den „institutionellen Fragen“, einem „institutionellen Rahmenabkommen“ und neuerdings – seit dem Juni 2017 – einem „Konsolidierungsabkommen“. Das Thema erscheint regelmässig in den Medien und ist z.T. stark umstritten. Dementsprechend unterschiedlich wird die Sachlage dargestellt – mit der Folge, dass unklar bleibt, worum es denn eigentlich genau geht. Das vorliegende Brevier versucht, wichtige, immer wiederkehrende Diskussionspunkte zu klären und so zum besseren Verständnis der komplexen Thematik beizutragen