Answers Key
1.a, 2.a
1. During his stay in Paris, a British tourist suffered injury resulting from a violent assault at
the exit of a metro station. In France, victims of an assault resulting in physical injury were
entitled to award of state compensation for harm caused in that state, but only if they had
French citizenship or held a residence permit. The Court of Justice ruled that the right in a
Member State to financial compensation in the case of physical injury is part of the right to
receive services under the same conditions as nationals of that Member State. Did the
conditions under which victims of assault were awarded state compensation in France
constitute discrimination that is prohibited under EU law?
a) Yes
b) No
2. Spain allowed free entry to national museums only to its nationals, foreigners resident in
Spain, and citizens of other EU member states under the age of 21. Citizens of other member
states over the age of 21 were required to pay an entrance fee. The European Commission
claimed that the freedom to provide services recognized by the Treaty includes the freedom
for the recipients of services, including tourists, to go to another Member State in order to
enjoy those services under the same conditions as nationals. The Commission maintained
that right relates not only to access to services but also to all the ancillary advantages that
affect the conditions under which those services are provided or received. Since visiting
museums is one of the determining reasons for which tourists, as recipients of services,
decide to go to another Member State, there is a close link between the freedom of movement
which they enjoy under the Treaty and museum admission conditions. The Kingdom of
Spain stated that the rules in question were not discriminatory in so far as Article 22 (3) of
the Regulation on State-Owned Museums and the Spanish Museum System, specifically
allowed for the treatment afforded to Spanish nationals to be extended to nationals of other
Member States. According to the Commission, this argument could not be accepted. While
for Spanish nationals the right of free admission stemmed directly from the Regulation, the
grant of that advantage to foreigners requires a decision of the Council of Ministers. At that
time, however, the Council of Ministers had not made use of its power under Article 22 (3)
so only foreigners living in Spain and persons under 21 years of age enjoyed free admission
to Spanish museums. Did the conditions under which citizens of other member states over
the age of 21 were required to pay an entrance fee to Spanish museums constitute dis-
crimination that is prohibited under EU law?
a) Yes, the conditions constituted direct discrimination
b) Yes, the conditions constituted indirect discrimination
c) No
(To return to your book please click on the “Page Back-Arrow” in your browser)