Universiẗat, Diss., 2006--Heidelberg. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 339-353).

The impact of Directive 2004/38 upon the free movement of nationals of the European Union with regard to relevant case-law of the European Court of Justice This diploma thesis deals with impact of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States on the freedom of movement. The first chapter of thesis aims to cover main points of development of the right to free movement. From the right of workers as an economic factor to the general right of every citizen of Europe. As far as the introducing of the European Union Citizenship was very important point for the development of right to free movement, this chapter also concerns evaluation of this phenomenon. Further this chapter contains analysis of the most important cases rendered by the Court of Justice of the European Union which affected the right of free movement mainly since European Union Citizenship has been established. The second chapter is the core of this thesis. It comprises analysis of the text of Directive 2004/38. It is giving a complete elaboration on the subject of Directive, beneficients of rights, conditions and rights. As far as the Directive 2004/38 is repealing number of...

Quel point commun existe-t-il entre les footballeurs Jean-Marc Bosman, Nicolas Anelka (à l'époque où, mineur, il quitte le club du PSG pour celui d'Arsenal), et Philippe Mexès ?Ces trois footballeurs ont fait l'objet d'affaires révélant des initiatives individuelles dont l'arrière plan en vient à discuter l'application de la liberté de circulation des footballeurs. Tandis qu'ils revendiquent une cause personnelle pour davantage de justice les concernant, les protagonistes qui se mobilisent transforment la dispute. On assiste à l'ouverture de débats qui, dès lors, dépassent la cause individuelle du footballeur. Il en résulte que le programme met en exergue ce que font les acteurs lorsqu’ils questionnent ce qui semble aller de soi. La thèse examine également les protagonistes dans le cours de l’action face aux transformations successives des débats. Enfin, elle s'intéresse à la façon dont un simple cas en vient à reconfigurer le milieu du football et par là, à impulser et à engager des transformations sociales plus larges. / What do the football players Jean-Marc Bosman, Nicolas Anelka (as a young player, when he leaves the football club PSG for Arsenal), and Philippe Mexès have in common?These three football players have been at the center of sports affair revealing individual initiatives where the background concerns the application of the freedom of movement for football players. Although in each case, the football players call for an individual cause, the cause is transformed during the polemics by the protagonists. We notice that the debate opens up for other issues which overrun the football player’s individual cause. This research focuses on what the actors do when they are questioning the matter of course. This thesis also examines the protagonists in their action when faced to the transformations of the debate. Finally, the thesis explores how a simple case reconfigures the world of football and hereby animates and initiates social transformations on a larger scale.

The transfer system was created in order to control player movement between football clubs and has existed since the late nineteenth century. During the negotiation of today’s transfer rules FIFA, UEFA and the Commission found that a breach of contract during the season could upset the balance of competition and therefore should be restricted. It was considered necessary to strengthen the contractual stability and to apply a special rule to preserve the regularity and proper functioning of competition. This was done by the means of a provision stipulating that a football player only can be registered to play with a national association during one of the two registration periods per year, generally known as the transfer windows. Sport has never been included in the formal structures of the European Union and the regulation of sport has instead materialized through verdicts from the European Court of Justice. One of the most influential statements emerging from the Court is that sport is subject to Community law in so far it constitutes an economic activity. Consequently, if the activity is economic there is a risk that it infringes EU law. The purpose of this master thesis is to examine the FIFA transfer window system and to determine whether it violates Article 39 and/or Article 81 EC. The transfer windows, a regulation strengthened by the ECJ in the case of Lehtonen, restrict the ability of players to seek alternative employment and could therefore be regarded as a violation of the free movement of workers. In order to trigger the Treaty provisions guarding the right of freedom of movement the person in question must be a national of a Member State of the European Union and the activity must have a territorial dimension beyond the borders of a single Member State of the European Union. The person in question must also be engaged in some kind of economic activity. It is, however, clear that football players who are members of the European Union and are applying for a job in another Member State, and are performing at a certain level, fulfil these requirements. Footballers should therefore be considered as workers within the meaning of Article 39 EC and the prohibition of discrimination contained in that article which catches non-discriminatory private collective measures, such as the transfer system, invented by regulatory bodies like FIFA and UEFA. When considering the FIFA “windows system” it is clear that it is liable of restricting the ability of players to seek alternative employment in another Member State and should therefore be regarded as a violation of Article 39 EC. Nevertheless, restricted transfer periods have been found by the ECJ to be objectively justified as having sporting benefits in the Belgian Basketball league. It is, however, likely that the “window system”, as it operates in European football, goes beyond what is necessary to achieve team and player contract stability since it is too restrictive and somewhat redundant. Consequently, the FIFA transfer windows do not comply with the requirements of the principle of proportionality and should therefore, if challenged, be regarded as a violation of Article 39 EC. The use of transfer windows in European football can also be considered to be an issue for competition law and in particular Article 81 EC. The article prohibits all agreements between undertakings that restrict competition and affect trade between Member States and has the objective to protect consumers, enhance their welfare and to facilitate the creation of a single European market. The ECJ has, however, acknowledged a certain type of sporting rule that, even though it restricts competition, will be granted immunity from Article 81 EC. The FIFA “windows system” should not be regarded as such a rule since it does not fulfil the required conditions. The transfer windows do little for the competitive balance within the European football. It may be argued that it preserves the appeal and the unpredictability of the finishing stages of a championship. However, they also prevent clubs from developing their economic activity and restrict the free play of the market forces of supply and demand. Furthermore, the “windows system” hinders certain clubs from raising the quality of their sporting performance since clubs in minor leagues with a closed window are losing their best players to clubs in a better league with an open window, without being able to replace them. All of this affects the small and economically weak clubs and strengthens the position of the financially strong clubs. As a result a few strong clubs will, contrary to the best interest of consumers, continue to dominate European football. The FIFA regulation of transfer windows is therefore likely to fall under Article 81(1) EC. It is unlikely that the pro-competitive benefits of the FIFA transfer windows outweigh its restrictive effects since it is improbable that they would be considered the least restrictive means of creating these benefits. Subsequently, the FIFA “windows system” would not qualify for an exemption under Article 81(3) EC and should, if challenged, be void under Article 81(2) EC.

Julia Fransson och Amanda Knutsson Rörelseglädje Hur förskollärare arbetar för att locka fram rörelseglädjen hos barn i förskoleklass. Antal sidor: 28 _______________________________________________________________________ Syftet med denna uppsats är att undersöka hur förskollärare i förskoleklass planerar och arbetar för att skoldagen ska innehålla fysisk aktivitet där alla barn inspireras och känner rörelseglädje. På vilket/ vilka sätt arbetar förskollärarna för att få barn i förskoleklass att känna rörelseglädje och utveckla en fortsatt hälsosam livsstil? Vilka barn i förskoleklass uppfattar förskollärarna inte har funnit rörelseglädjen? För att få svar på dessa frågor genomfördes kvalitativa intervjuer med åtta förskollärare som arbetar i förskoleklass. Av dessa arbetar samtliga för att alla barn ska få känna rörelseglädje. Genom intervjuerna framgick det att detta arbete sker genom att stötta barnen och få in spontan rörelse i den dagliga verksamheten. Det är viktigt att arbeta med saker barnen är bra på för att på så sätt stärka deras självförtroende och självkänsla. Oftast är det de barn som är väl utvecklade motoriskt som uppskattar rörelseaktiviteter och därmed känner glädje. Resultatet visar att barn påverkas hemifrån och deras inställning till fysisk aktivitet är oftast liknande deras föräldrars.

<p>The transfer system was created in order to control player movement between football clubs and has existed since the late nineteenth century. During the negotiation of today’s transfer rules FIFA, UEFA and the Commission found that a breach of contract during the season could upset the balance of competition and therefore should be restricted. It was considered necessary to strengthen the contractual stability and to apply a special rule to preserve the regularity and proper functioning of competition. This was done by the means of a provision stipulating that a football player only can be registered to play with a national association during one of the two registration periods per year, generally known as the transfer windows.</p><p>Sport has never been included in the formal structures of the European Union and the regulation of sport has instead materialized through verdicts from the European Court of Justice. One of the most influential statements emerging from the Court is that sport is subject to Community law in so far it constitutes an economic activity. Consequently, if the activity is economic there is a risk that it infringes EU law. The purpose of this master thesis is to examine the FIFA transfer window system and to determine whether it violates Article 39 and/or Article 81 EC.</p><p>The transfer windows, a regulation strengthened by the ECJ in the case of <em>Lehtonen</em>, restrict the ability of players to seek alternative employment and could therefore be regarded as a violation of the free movement of workers. In order to trigger the Treaty provisions guarding the right of freedom of movement the person in question must be a national of a Member State of the European Union and the activity must have a territorial dimension beyond the borders of a single Member State of the European Union. The person in question must also be engaged in some kind of economic activity. It is, however, clear that football players who are members of the European Union and are applying for a job in another Member State, and are performing at a certain level, fulfil these requirements. Footballers should therefore be considered as workers within the meaning of Article 39 EC and the prohibition of discrimination contained in that article which catches non-discriminatory private collective measures, such as the transfer system, invented by regulatory bodies like FIFA and UEFA.</p><p>When considering the FIFA “windows system” it is clear that it is liable of restricting the ability of players to seek alternative employment in another Member State and should therefore be regarded as a violation of Article 39 EC. Nevertheless, restricted transfer periods have been found by the ECJ to be objectively justified as having sporting benefits in the Belgian Basketball league. It is, however, likely that the “window system”, as it operates in European football, goes beyond what is necessary to achieve team and player contract stability since it is too restrictive and somewhat redundant. Consequently, the FIFA transfer windows do not comply with the requirements of the principle of proportionality and should therefore, if challenged, be regarded as a violation of Article 39 EC.</p><p>The use of transfer windows in European football can also be considered to be an issue for competition law and in particular Article 81 EC. The article prohibits all agreements between undertakings that restrict competition and affect trade between Member States and has the objective to protect consumers, enhance their welfare and to facilitate the creation of a single European market. The ECJ has, however, acknowledged a certain type of sporting rule that, even though it restricts competition, will be granted immunity from Article 81 EC. The FIFA “windows system” should not be regarded as such a rule since it does not fulfil the required conditions.</p><p>The transfer windows do little for the competitive balance within the European football. It may be argued that it preserves the appeal and the unpredictability of the finishing stages of a championship. However, they also prevent clubs from developing their economic activity and restrict the free play of the market forces of supply and demand. Furthermore, the “windows system” hinders certain clubs from raising the quality of their sporting performance since clubs in minor leagues with a closed window are losing their best players to clubs in a better league with an open window, without being able to replace them. All of this affects the small and economically weak clubs and strengthens the position of the financially strong clubs. As a result a few strong clubs will, contrary to the best interest of consumers, continue to dominate European football. The FIFA regulation of transfer windows is therefore likely to fall under Article 81(1) EC.</p><p>It is unlikely that the pro-competitive benefits of the FIFA transfer windows outweigh its restrictive effects since it is improbable that they would be considered the least restrictive means of creating these benefits. Subsequently, the FIFA “windows system” would not qualify for an exemption under Article 81(3) EC and should, if challenged, be void under Article 81(2) EC.</p>

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 1999. / Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaf 23). Also available on the Internet.

Freedom of movement is a matter of individual freedom rather than only a tool for addressing global distributive injustice. Freedom of movement has normative value whether or not it concerns interstate borders. Migration, in the sense of interstate relocation, is a subcategory of movement, which can involve travel, temporary relocation or permanent relocation--a brief walk, or a move halfway around the world. My argument about freedom of movement has two essential elements: first, that freedom of movement has noninstrumental value, not only instrumental value, and that it deserves more weight and attention than liberals usually give it; and second, I justify this and its implications by emphasizing the cross-scalar connections between local and global movement and showing that the difference between internal and interstate movement is not as significant as is usually assumed to be. Freedom of movement is proposed as a unit of concern and a matter of degree, with principles and restrictions functioning in parallel at both levels. The cohesive account of liberal freedom of movement offers the chance to think about people moving and staying as one overarching category. This challenges the characterization of migration as anomalous and captures the chance to treat like cases alike. Chapter Two makes an argument for freedom of movement as a noninstrumental liberal value to which the normative weight of the instrumental value of freedom of movement is added. Chapter Three explores small-scale movement in the countryside and the city and proposes a stronger valuation of freedom of movement particularly vis-à-vis private property rights. Chapter Four considers theoretical and legal arguments involving intrafederal movement in the United States and Germany and compares intrafederal exit to exit from the state. Chapter Five considers several free movement regimes in Europe to draw out the similarities between interstate, intrafederal, and local movement. Throughout these chapters I show that there are many legitimate ways in which freedom of movement can and should be restricted at the internal level, but this is not sufficient to conclude that interstate movement can be arbitrarily restricted. / Government

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 1999. / Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaf 23). Also available on the Internet.

Thesis (doctoral)--Universität Innsbruck, 2002. / "Ausgezeichnet mit dem Jean Monnet Wissenschaftspreis für Europarecht, 2003." Includes bibliographical references and index.