Abstract

AbstractThe long-established contradictions of free movement law are caused by the implicit reference to two contradictory paradigms of economic integration. The first paradigm seeks to avoid the competition among private businesses being distorted by national regulations, therefore aiming at the creation of a ‘level playing field’ (regulatory neutrality paradigm). The second paradigm seeks to ensure the proper functioning of the process of competition among Member States, and accordingly aims at maximising the opportunities for ‘regulatory arbitrage’ (regulatory competition paradigm). In more detail, the tension between those two paradigms of economic integration results in three central nodes of internal market law: the eventuality of a positive harmonisation, the negative harmonisation conundrum, and the regulatory mobility dilemma. In sum, one (free movement) law is assigned the contradictory mission of ensuring the proper functioning of two competitive processes: the competition among private businesses (regulatory neutrality) and among Member States (regulatory competition).

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.