This thesis deals with the institute of the temporary posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services between the member states of the European Union. It aims to describe in detail and to analyse the legal regulation of the issue and to highlight the uncertainties that occur during the realisation of the posting. The first part deals with the primary law of the European Union and with the related jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union, while emphasising the link to the internal market and the freedom to provide services. The second part deals with the detailed analysis of the Directive 96/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1996 concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services which represents the basic regulation of the posting of workers at the European level. It is followed by the third part which deals with the later adopted Directive 2014/67/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on the enforcement of Directive 96/71/EC concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services which seeks to prevent fraudulent practices and provide better information on the labour law conditions to be applied to posted workers. Part four deals with the proposal for...

Le détachement dans le cadre d’une prestation de services est au cœur d’enjeux socio-économiques. La liberté de prestation de services permet aux entreprises établies dans un État membre de l’Union européenne de fournir des services dans d’autres États membres. L’opération de détachement permet à l’entreprise d’affecter ses travailleurs à la réalisation de la prestation de services. Cette opération économique présente des intérêts et des enjeux incontestables pour les travailleurs détachés, pour l’État d’envoi et l’État d’accueil. La libre prestation de services est essentielle au bon fonctionnement du marché intérieur, elle contribue indéniablement à la croissance économique. Le détachement de travailleurs pose la problématique de la protection offerte à ces travailleurs. En effet, l’opération de détachement présente des risques de concurrence entre les travailleurs, de fraude et de dumping social. La protection des travailleurs détachés prévue par la directive « détachement » présente des limites. Des dysfonctionnements majeurs ont été recensés, notamment les sources de protection, les contours de la protection, l’effectivité de la directive et les mesures de contrôle. La directive 96/71 a pour objectif principal de garantir la libre prestation de services. Elle organise le cadre légal des règles applicables au détachement de travailleur avec une dualité de règles. Ce cadre prévoit l’application des règles de l’État d’accueil avec le « noyau dur » de protection et les règles de l’État d’envoi pour les éléments hors du noyau dur. Cette dualité de règles s’est avérée insuffisante et problématique dans certaines situations. La directive « détachement » a été consolidée par la directive d’exécution qui est entrée en vigueur le 28 mai 2014 et dont la transposition a été prévue au plus tard le 18 juin 2016. Celle-ci a pour objectif de renforcer la protection du travailleur détaché, c’est une avancée majeure en matière de détachement, notamment en matière de contrôle de l’application de la directive détachement, de responsabilité du sous-traitant dans le cadre d’une prestation de services, de coopération entre les États membres. La Commission européenne a présenté, le 8 mars 2016, une proposition de directive destinée à mieux définir les conditions de mise en œuvre du détachement des travailleurs. Le détachement nous interroge sur la construction européenne. Précisément, quel avenir pour l’Europe ? / Secondment as part of the delivery of services is key to socioeconomic challenges. The freedom to provide services enables companies which are established in a Member State of the European Union to provide services to other Member States. Secondment allows companies to assign their workers to tasks involving the provision of services. This economic operation offers undisputed benefits and challenges for the seconded workers, the State sending them, and the State receiving them. Freedom to provide services is essential to the proper functioning of the internal market, and it also makes an undeniable contribution to economic growth. The secondment of workers raises the issue of how to protect these workers. Indeed it throws up the risk of competition between workers, fraud and social dumping. The protection received by seconded workers under the “secondment” directive is limited. Major dysfunctions have been identified, particularly with regards to sources of protection, the outlines of this protection, the effectiveness of the directive and the measures used to verify it. The main objective of Directive 96/71 is to guarantee the freedom to provide services. It sets out the legal framework for the rules that apply to the posting of workers with two sets of regulations. This framework enables the application of the regulations of the host State for “core” protection and the regulations of the State which receives the workers for any elements that fall outside the core. This duality of regulations has proved insufficient and problematic in some situations. The “secondment” directive was consolidated by the executive directive which came into effect on 28 May 2014 but is to be transposed by 18 June 2016 at the latest. The aim is to increase the protection of seconded workers, which is a major step forward for secondment, in particular with regard to applying the secondment directive, the responsibility of the subcontractor when providing services and cooperation between the Member States. On March 8th, 2016, the European commission presented a directive proposition aimed at defining the conditions of implementation of workers secondment in a better way. Secondment raises questions about how Europe is constructed. More specifically, what does the future look like for Europe?

This doctoral thesis discusses temporary movements of service providers in the EU Internal Market. Movements such as posting of workers of cross-border movements of self-employed persons constitute one of the pillars of freedom to provide services. As granted by the Treaty on functioning of the European Union, businesses may temporarily conduct entrepreneurial activities in another EU Member State without being established there. Typical cases include installation of equipment purchased by a resident of another EU country, short-term construction works, trainings of personnel in foreign companies etc. Posted workers remain employed by a company in their country of origin and do not seek access to labour markets in the host state. Self-employed persons run their business activities based on a trade license issued in the country of origin and do not set up a business in the country of destination. Nevertheless, in contrast to freedom of establishment, such activities need to be of a temporary -- not repeating, irregular, not continuous - character. In practice, this definition is rather vague and there is no clear frontier between temporary movements and freedom of establishment. Temporary character of postings raises the question how to obtain statistics on numbers of persons providing services through temporary movements or volume of corresponding services. Given the level of integration, there are no statistics based on traditional movements' observing such as visa or work permits. Lack of information about providers' flows may lead to difficulties in estimating the impact of related barriers as well as benefits from further liberalization. The Services Directive 2006/123/EC is the most recent norm regulating provision of services in the Internal Market. Since the final version does not contain the most progressive provisions such as country of origin principle, we may examine whether it is targeted at barriers faced by the businesses during temporary movements. Taking in account all above mentioned topics, this thesis provides complex multi-disciplinary analysis of conditions for provision of services with temporary movements of natural persons in the Internal Market. In particular, it tests following hypotheses: 1. Due to depth of integration and subsequent abolition of visa and work permit requirements; there is a lack of statistical resources on provision of services with temporary movements of natural persons. With existing tools, reliable statistics cannot be obtained. 2. Lack of statistical data on temporary movements prevents us from quantifying impacts of remaining barriers to temporary postings. 3. Nevertheless, there is evidence on persisting discriminatory barriers to postings by most vulnerable businesses - Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs). 4. The implementation of Services Directive in its final version has only a limited impact on elimination of barriers which hinder temporary postings by SMEs. The first and second hypotheses were rejected, hypothesis three and four confirmed. Movement of providers, as well as its impact on labour markets of host countries may be estimated via E 101 or A 1 forms issued by national social security authorities. Subsequently, indices of restrictiveness may be constructed following to data collection at national levels or databases. Data mining from SME feedback database proved that Member States still maintain barriers such as license requirements, work permit requirements or lengthy procedures on recognition of qualifications. During the reference period 2006-9 the SMEs mostly complained about problems related to value-added tax, qualification issues or labour law provisions applicable on postings of workers. Such areas are, however, exempt form the scope of the Services Directive. Given the complexity of analysis, findings of this thesis may be used both in practice and academic field.

The aim of this thesis is to present the phenomenon of posting workers within the EU in the context of the freedom to provide services. The author introduces the de lege lata legal framework in a complex and chronological manner, taking into consideration the motives and political pressure behind key modifications. Accordingly, the thesis examines relevant Treaty provisions, case law and its evolution, key secondary acts, as well as the relation of such sources to legal acts which address posting workers in an indirect manner. The author focuses on the analysis of existing key provisions, their practical impact and insufficiencies. However, she also approaches the topic from the de lege ferenda perspective by presenting the ongoing revision of the current legal framework and by considering other potential changes which could improve the regulation of posted workers in the future. Furthermore, the thesis demonstrates the complexity of posting workers by drawing attention to the colliding interests of involved member states and parties, showing the sensitivity of the subject. This underlines the fact that the phenomenon cannot be separated from its political context and is condemned to a constant balancing of two colliding interests - the freedom to provide services and social protection of posted...

Ausgangspunkt dieser Studie stellt die sog. „Patientenrichtlinie“ 2011/24/EU dar. Diese beruht auf der Rspr. des EuGH, wonach für die Inanspruchnahme grenzüberschreitender Gesundheitsleistungen die Dienstleistungsfreiheit Anwendung findet. Bezogen auf den Bereich des Gesundheitswesens steht die Dienstleistungsfreiheit jedoch in einem Spannungsverhältnis zu der Organisationshoheit der Mitgliedstaaten für ihre Gesundheitssysteme. Diese Arbeit widmet sich daher zunächst dem Begriff der Gesundheitsleistungen und führt das Bestehen des Spannungsverhältnisses auf die historische Entwicklung der Sozialregelungen in den Verträgen zurück. In einem weiteren Schritt wird dann die tatsächliche Anwendbarkeit der Dienstleistungsfreiheit für den Bereich der Gesundheitsleistungen untersucht. Im Anschluss daran erfolgt eine Analyse der Rechtsprechung des EuGH. Dieser versucht das Spannungsverhältnis auf der Ebene der „Rechtfertigung“ zu lösen. Letztlich führt jedoch dieser Ansatz nicht zur Lösung dieses Spannungsverhältnisses, da durch die Auslegungsbedürftigkeit des Primärrechts rechtliche Unsicherheiten entstehen. Auch die Patientenrichtlinie, welche auf der Rechtsprechung des EuGH beruht, kann daher nur bedingt zur Beseitigung der bestehenden Unsicherheiten bei grenzüberschreitenden Gesundheitsleistungen beitragen. Ebenso können weitere in der Literatur vorgestellte Alternativen das Grundproblem nicht lösen. Notwendig wäre vielmehr eine klarere Abgrenzung der Regelungszuständigkeiten im Primärrecht selbst. / The starting point for this study is the so-called „Patient Directive“ 2011/24/EU. This is based on the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, according to which when using cross-border healthcare services the free movement of services finds application. Referring to the area of healthcare the free movement of services however is in a relationship of tension with the organisational sovereignty of member states for their healthcare systems. For this reason this work addresses itself firstly to the concept of healthcare services and leads the existence of a relationship of tension back to the historical development of social regulations in the contracts. In a further step then the actual applicability of the free movement of services for the area healthcare services is examined. Following this an analysis of the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice takes place. This attempts to solve the relationship of tension at the level of „justification“. In the end however this starting-point does not lead to solving this tension relationship, for through the need for interpretation of primary law legal uncertainties arise. Also the patient directive, which is based on the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, can for this reason only partially contribute to the removal of uncertainties existing with cross-border healthcare services. Equally further alternatives presented in literature cannot solve the basic problem. Rather a clearer delimitation in the primary law itself would be required.

Ausgangspunkt dieser Studie stellt die sog. „Patientenrichtlinie“ 2011/24/EU dar. Diese beruht auf der Rspr. des EuGH, wonach für die Inanspruchnahme grenzüberschreitender Gesundheitsleistungen die Dienstleistungsfreiheit Anwendung findet. Bezogen auf den Bereich des Gesundheitswesens steht die Dienstleistungsfreiheit jedoch in einem Spannungsverhältnis zu der Organisationshoheit der Mitgliedstaaten für ihre Gesundheitssysteme. Diese Arbeit widmet sich daher zunächst dem Begriff der Gesundheitsleistungen und führt das Bestehen des Spannungsverhältnisses auf die historische Entwicklung der Sozialregelungen in den Verträgen zurück. In einem weiteren Schritt wird dann die tatsächliche Anwendbarkeit der Dienstleistungsfreiheit für den Bereich der Gesundheitsleistungen untersucht. Im Anschluss daran erfolgt eine Analyse der Rechtsprechung des EuGH. Dieser versucht das Spannungsverhältnis auf der Ebene der „Rechtfertigung“ zu lösen. Letztlich führt jedoch dieser Ansatz nicht zur Lösung dieses Spannungsverhältnisses, da durch die Auslegungsbedürftigkeit des Primärrechts rechtliche Unsicherheiten entstehen. Auch die Patientenrichtlinie, welche auf der Rechtsprechung des EuGH beruht, kann daher nur bedingt zur Beseitigung der bestehenden Unsicherheiten bei grenzüberschreitenden Gesundheitsleistungen beitragen. Ebenso können weitere in der Literatur vorgestellte Alternativen das Grundproblem nicht lösen. Notwendig wäre vielmehr eine klarere Abgrenzung der Regelungszuständigkeiten im Primärrecht selbst. / The starting point for this study is the so-called „Patient Directive“ 2011/24/EU. This is based on the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, according to which when using cross-border healthcare services the free movement of services finds application. Referring to the area of healthcare the free movement of services however is in a relationship of tension with the organisational sovereignty of member states for their healthcare systems. For this reason this work addresses itself firstly to the concept of healthcare services and leads the existence of a relationship of tension back to the historical development of social regulations in the contracts. In a further step then the actual applicability of the free movement of services for the area healthcare services is examined. Following this an analysis of the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice takes place. This attempts to solve the relationship of tension at the level of „justification“. In the end however this starting-point does not lead to solving this tension relationship, for through the need for interpretation of primary law legal uncertainties arise. Also the patient directive, which is based on the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, can for this reason only partially contribute to the removal of uncertainties existing with cross-border healthcare services. Equally further alternatives presented in literature cannot solve the basic problem. Rather a clearer delimitation in the primary law itself would be required.

Les Etats membres de l’Union européenne sont confrontés à des défis communs de l’offre de soins dont le vieillissement de la population, le déséquilibre entre l’offre et la demande de soins, l’augmentation des coûts des nouvelles technologies médicales. La mobilité des médecins peut être envisagée comme une réponse à ces défis, dans le cadre du droit de libre circulation des travailleurs de l’Union européenne. La thèse étudie la validité de ces réponses à partir d’une typologie des pays qui représente des systèmes de santé idéaux-typiques de l'Union (France, Royaume-Uni, Italie et Roumanie). Si la variable économique (montant de la rémunération) joue un rôle clé dans la migration, elle est ajustée en fonction des caractéristiques de la prestation des soins de santé des modèles d'organisation des systèmes de santé. Prenant acte de la diversité des réponses à ces défis formulées par les pays de l’Union européenne, l’étude propose quelques réflexions à l’amélioration de ces flux migratoires médicaux en s’appuyant sur des éléments clés du droit européen de la santé : droit de liberté de circulation des médecins salariés, de liberté d’établissement et de prestation de services pour les médecins exerçant en libéral, d’équivalence des diplômes et de coordination de différents systèmes de sécurité sociale. / European Union member states have faced growing challenges in health care provision, such as: an aging population, an imbalance between supply and demand for care, and the rising cost of new medical technologies. Physician mobility could be a response to these challenges in the context of the right of free movement of workers within the European Union (EU). This thesis examines the validity of these responses from a typology of countries representing ideal-type health systems in the EU (France, UK, Italy and Romania). If economic variable (amount of compensation) plays a key role in the migration, it is adjusted according to the characteristics of the delivery of health care organizational models of health systems. Noting the diverse response of EU member states to these challenges, the study offers some thoughts on improving the medical migration flows based on the following key elements of European health law: right to freedom of movement of salaried physicians, freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services for physicians in private practice, equivalence of diplomas and coordination of various social security systems.