This thesis deals with the theme of bilateral relations between the EU and Switzerland, focusing on the current phenomenon of migration. The EU and Switzerland cooperate on bilateral sectoral basis, since Switzerland (hence the citizens of Switzerland) does not want to integrate into the European internal market to maintain its sovereignty and autonomy. Within the first series of bilateral agreements between the EU and Switzerland an agreement on free movement of persons was signed, thereby Switzerland opened its labour market to EU citizens. In February 2014, however, the citizens of Switzerland used the institution of direct democracy and adopted by a narrow majority the initiative to stop mass immigration. This step disrupted the agreement on free movement of persons and the complex negotiations started in order to solve this impasse. The aim of the thesis is to evaluate the impacts of immigration on the Swiss economy and the subsequent evaluation of the reasonableness to mitigate the immigration through a citizens' initiative.

Diploma thesis "Free movement of goods and integration of the Czech republic" deals with the matter of free movement of goods in the European internal market and studies the development of the Czech integration in this area during her association with the EU. The diploma thesis monitors the period 1989-2006 and aims to evaluate whether the process was continual during the period or if it changed. The diploma thesis also evaluates if there were some significant problems during the process of the integration and searches for their reasons. Diploma thesis decomposes the problem into several partial problems, of which the most important are: goods flows between Czech Republic and the EU (mostly territorial and commodity structure..), technical aspects (technical harmonization, standards and norms, law convergence), economic context (GDP, balance of payments, etc.).

The diploma thesis deals with designing new local roads, zone 30 and reconstruction of road Vrbenská street, that is situated in České Budějovice. These roads are connected to Vrbenská street. The construction is composed of seven branches in total. These branches will serve as access points to new buildings. The project is designed with consideration to static traffic, public transport, pedestrian traffic and barrier-free movement of people with limited mobility. The project also includes design visualizations.

The subject-matter of this master thesis is cross-border healthcare in the European Union. It describes the history and development, but focuses mainly on the current legal framework represented by Regulation No 883/2004, and mainly Directive 2011/24 on the application of patients' rights in cross-border health care. The aim of the master thesis is to thoroughly analyse the current legal framework with a focus on patients' rights, to examine the impact of the Directive, to explain an issue of overlap between the Directive and Regulation, and to evaluate the transposition of the Directive in the Czech Republic. To achieve this aim, it is necessary to examine the topic with respect to the historical and political development of the European Union and to the case law of the European Court of Justice. The thesis is divided into four chapters. First of which concerns European Union competences in health law, explaining the history of incorporating health law provisions into the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, as it is called today. This historical development is important for understanding the issue of cross-border healthcare. The second chapter is mainly focused on the important case law of the ECJ concerning patients' rights. Although initially I will discuss the development in...

The purpose of the paper is to contribute to the scientific research field by explaining whether, and if so on what grounds, the Swedish targeted interest deduction limitation legislation can be tested in the European Court of Justice against the free movement of capital. In addition, the study examines whether there can be considered a mutual priority regarding the free movement of capital and the freedom of establishment. The study conducted in the paper is based on the Swedish law, the preparatory work and doctrine, which is combined with case law. Initially, the meaning of the targeted interest deduction limitation rules is presented as well as the theoretical scope of the legislation in relation to its scope in practice. The targeted interest deduction limitation rules are specific provisions addressing the deductibility of interest incurred by certain companies as a result of intra-group financing. The theoretical scope differs from the practical scope due to the vague conceptual definitions in both the legislative text and the preparatory works. Furthermore, it is analysed which determines when the free movement of capital and the freedom of establishment should be applied, based on the EU case law. The study indicates that the controlling interest must be given a significant weight when considering the purpose of the national legislation, but it is difficult to interpret exactly when such an interest occurs in practice. Lastly, it is studied whether it might be possible to review the targeted interest deduction limitation rules against the free movement of capital, and if so, on which grounds. The study shows that there are possibilities to review the targeted interest deduction limitation rules against the free movement of capital. There are incentives that indicate that such a review is possible if both Swedish and EU law practice is interpreted in a fairly narrow way. / Syftet med uppsatsen är att bidra till det vetenskapliga forskningsfältet genom att redogöra för huruvida, och i så fall på vilka grunder, de svenska riktade ränteavdragsbegränsningsreglerna kan prövas gentemot den grundläggande EU-rättsliga fördragsfriheten beträffande fri rörlighet för kapitalrörelser. Därutöver undersöks om det kan anses föreligga en inbördes prioritet beträffande den fria rörligheten för kapital och etableringsfriheten. Den utredning som genomförs i uppsatsen tar avstamp i lagtext, förarbeten och doktrin, vilket kombineras med rättspraxis. Inledningsvis presenteras innebörden av de riktade ränteavdragsbegränsningsreglerna och hur lagreglernas teoretiska tillämpningsområde förhåller sig till dess tillämpningsområde i realiteten. De riktade ränteavdragsbegränsningsreglerna utgörs av särskilda bestämmelser vilka behandlar vissa företags avdragsmöjligheter beträffande räntor uppkomna till följd av, inom en intressegemenskap, intern finansiering. Det teoretiska tillämpningsområdet skiljer sig från tillämpningsområdet i realiteten till följd av vaga begreppsdefinitioner i såväl lagtext som i förarbeten. Vidare analyseras vad det är som avgör när fördragsfriheten den fria rörligheten för kapital respektive etableringsfriheten skall tillämpas, vilket tar avstamp i EU-rättslig praxis. Av utredningen framgår att det bestämmande inflytandet skall tillerkännas stor vikt vid beaktandet av de nationella lagreglernas ändamål, exakt när ett sådant inflytande föreligger är dock svårt att tyda i praxis. Avslutningsvis undersöks om det bör vara möjligt att göra en prövning av de riktade ränteavdragsbegränsningsreglerna gentemot den fria rörligheten för kapital, och i så fall på vilka grunder. Studien visar att det finns möjligheter att för att pröva de riktade ränteavdragsbegränsningsreglerna gentemot fördragsfriheten om fria kapitalrörelser. Det finns incitament som tyder på att en sådan prövning är möjlig under förutsättning att såväl svensk som EU-rättslig praxis tolkas på ett tämligen snävt sätt.

Denna uppsats belyser problemet med användandet av begreppen EU-medborgare och EU-migrant, samt vad det är som avgör huruvida man skall bli betraktad som antingen det ena eller andra. Det råder fri rörlighet för alla EU-medborgare mellan medlemsstaterna, det skapar problem när grupper som rent juridiskt inte klassificeras som medborgare, och i stället klassificeras som migrant. Skillnaden mellan att vara EU-medborgare och EU-migrant är bland annat att det skiljer sig i åtnjutandet av det sociala skyddsnätet. Romer används som ett exempel genom hela uppsatsen då de har en historia som inte påminner om någon annan, samt för att det är ett aktuellt ämne i dagens EU. Genom en komparativ studie mellan två välfärdsstater, samt en diskursanalys där Benhabibs teori ”the rights of others” appliceras diskuteras huruvida alla inom EU kan åtnjuta de mänskliga rättigheterna. Benhabibs teori tydliggör nationalstaters rädsla gentemot det främmande och bekräftar att det sker en kränkning av de mänskliga rättigheterna när människor saknar medborgarskap. Slutsatsen av denna studie är att orsaken till att romska grupper ofta faller utanför det skyddsnät som finns är på grund av avsaknaden av subjektivitet. Nationalstater ser ofta romska grupper som icke-hanterbara och det smittar av sig på civilsamhället och den generella attityden gentemot romer är negativ. / This thesis highlights the problem with the use of the concepts “EU-citizen” and “EU-immigrant”, as well as what determines whether someone should be considered one or the other. Since freedom of movement is granted EU-citizens between member states, problems arise when groups that technically do not qualify as citizens, but are classified as migrants, utilize the freedom of mobility. The difference between being classified as an EU-citizen vs an EU-immigrant is the differences in the ability to enjoy the social safety net provided by the state. The Roma people will be used as an example throughout the thesis, as the history of the group is unique, and it is currently a topic of discussion in the EU.Through a comparative study of welfare states, along with a discourse analysis utilizing Benhabib’s theory of ”the rights of others”, a discussion will examine whether everyone in the EU have the opportunity to enjoy human rights.Benhabib’s theory clarifies the nation state’s fears of that considered foreign and confirms the violations of human rights that occur when people lack citizenship.The conclusion of the study is that the reason Roma groups often fall outside the social safety net is because the lack of subjectivity of states. Nation states often view Roma groups as non-manageable, the perception rubs off on civil society and generates generally negative attitudes towards the Roma.

The aim of my master thesis is to analyze hindrances to free movement of workers both from the theoretical point of view and in relation to the European Court of Justice cases. In the first part of the thesis I summarize the development of European integration and general principles of free movement of persons. Then the attention is paid to free movement of workers itself. The definition of a worker, primary and secondary legislation governing free movement of workers and the scope of free movement of workers are presented as well. Moreover, derogations from the principle of free movement of workers are discussed. The next part of the thesis is dedicated to the description of the European Court of Justice, its composition and various types of proceedings. In the last part of the thesis the most significant ECJ cases concerning hindrances to free movement of workers are selected and analyzed.

This DPhil thesis analyses the Takeover Bid Directive in the light of EU Law and examines the extent to which this Directive facilitates the exercise of the fundamental freedom of establishment and the free movement of capital in the internal market. Since the Directive is based on the EC Treaty chapter on freedom of establishment (Articles 43 and 44(2)(g) EC Treaty), it should in principle contribute to cross frontier corporate mobility in the internal market through takeover bids; this was the aim of the Commission in its various proposals. Takeover bids and the EC Treaty provisions on freedom of establishment are closely related. The Directive forms part of the EU company law harmonization programme whose weaknesses and limits are also explored. However, the Takeover Bid Directive is an EU company law instrument with strong links to EU capital market law. The initial aims of the EU legislature were to establish an internal market for companies and to achieve market integration in the field of EU company law. However, the Takeover Bid Directive is a compromise and watered down version of a proposal which the Commission envisaged would lead to a more effective pan-European takeover regime than that which actually proved possible. The need for compromise was the result of the very different legal and policy approaches of the Member States in the field of takeover regulation. Some provisions of the Directive are obligatory for all Member States. These provisions include the mandatory bid rule, the squeeze-out right, and the sell-out right. All these obligatory provisions of the Directive are in their present form open to criticism. The two key provisions of the Directive have been made optional for Member States. These are the non-frustration rule, requiring the board to obtain the prior authorization of the general meeting of shareholders before taking any action which could result in the frustration of the bid; and the breakthrough rule, requiring that any restrictions on the transfer of securities or voting rights provided for in the articles of association of the offeree company or in contractual agreements between the offeree company and the holders of its securities or in contractual agreements between holders of the offeree company’s securities shall not apply vis-à-vis the offeror during the time allowed for acceptance of the bid. Nevertheless, Member States, which opt out, are obliged to allow individual companies to opt in. Moreover, a reciprocity rule was also adopted, which allows Member States to permit those companies, which apply these provisions, to opt out again if they are the target of a bidder, which does not itself apply the same takeover provisions. Additionally, the non-frustration and the breakthrough rule are not fully comprehensive and even when a company applies them, it might still be able to evade their application since some corporate and financial structures remain outside the Directive’s scope. Finally, this thesis discusses the extent to which obstacles to cross border takeovers addressed by the Directive, or indeed left intact by the Directive, are to be regarded as restrictions on the right of establishment stricto sensu, or simply as obstacles in practice to making a successful takeover bid. More specifically, it scrutinizes the horizontal direct effect of the EC fundamental freedoms and seeks to analyze the extent to which conduct of the board and articles in the corporate constitution might be said to constitute restrictions on the freedom of establishment and on the free movement of capital.

This thesis deals with analysis of EU rules on entry and residence on the territory of Member States. These rules are described from the perspective of different groups of people, EU citizens, citizens of EFTA Member States, family members or citizens of Turkey, and also from the perspective of Member States participating in the Schengen Border Area and Member States outside this Area. The core of this thesis consist is the analysis of four key EU rules in this field, namely the Border Code (Regulation 562/2002), the Visa Code (Regulation 810/2009), the 539/2001 Regulation and the 2004/38 Directive, as well as relevant case law of the Court of Justice, that influences the interpretation of the rules in hand significantly. The rules are also assessed from the point of view of principles of legal certainty and legitimacy.

The aim of this paper is to investigate if it is compatible with the free movement of capital (Article 63 TFEU) to levy a withholding tax on Swedish-sourced dividends paid to non-EU investment funds with legal personality (in the paper referred to as investment companies). This question is of relevance since several Swedish intermediaries do not pay any income tax on dividends, either due to a formal tax exemption or to de facto practice. As such, it is clear from CJEU case law that non-EU investment companies should also be exempt from withholding tax on dividends, provided that they are in an objectively comparable situation with any of these Swedish entities and that no justification ground is applicable.   The conclusion of the thesis is that there are indications of that the current Swedish lower court practice, which is to deny comparability between non-EU investment companies and Swedish tax-exempt investment funds with reference to that the foreign entities have a different legal form, is contrary to EU law. Alternatively, it is possible to find discriminatory treatment when comparing the dividend tax treatment of a non-EU investment company with the dividend tax treatment of a Swedish fiscal investment enterprise (investmentföretag). For this reason, it is welcome that leave to appeal was recently granted by the Supreme Administrative Court of Sweden in one of the lower court cases dealing with this issue.