<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Schmidberger [2003]</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.eucaselaw.info/schmidberger-2003/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.eucaselaw.info/schmidberger-2003/</link>
	<description>a blog about leading judgments of the ECJ, CFI, CST and ECtHR</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:46:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: damir</title>
		<link>http://www.eucaselaw.info/schmidberger-2003/comment-page-1/#comment-20063</link>
		<dc:creator>damir</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:46:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eucaselaw.info/2007/06/05/schmidberger-2003/#comment-20063</guid>
		<description>I still dont understand, does this mean that member states can use fundamental human rights to justify derogations on FMG?
Even though most literature says that quantitative restrictions on FMG can be saved only by reference to derogations from paragraph 30 EC?
Thanks in advance!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I still dont understand, does this mean that member states can use fundamental human rights to justify derogations on FMG?<br />
Even though most literature says that quantitative restrictions on FMG can be saved only by reference to derogations from paragraph 30 EC?<br />
Thanks in advance!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: QuickLaw &#187; Blog Archive &#187; One Schmidberger with Omega Dressing Please</title>
		<link>http://www.eucaselaw.info/schmidberger-2003/comment-page-1/#comment-13565</link>
		<dc:creator>QuickLaw &#187; Blog Archive &#187; One Schmidberger with Omega Dressing Please</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2009 09:51:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eucaselaw.info/2007/06/05/schmidberger-2003/#comment-13565</guid>
		<description>[...] free movement of goods. So said the ECJ some time ago in the Schmidberger case. As the short lived EU Case Law digest pointed out, it is &#8220;probably&#8221; the first time that the ECJ found a source of law that [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] free movement of goods. So said the ECJ some time ago in the Schmidberger case. As the short lived EU Case Law digest pointed out, it is &#8220;probably&#8221; the first time that the ECJ found a source of law that [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Omega [2004] : EU Case Law</title>
		<link>http://www.eucaselaw.info/schmidberger-2003/comment-page-1/#comment-8</link>
		<dc:creator>Omega [2004] : EU Case Law</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Jun 2007 09:50:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eucaselaw.info/2007/06/05/schmidberger-2003/#comment-8</guid>
		<description>[...] ECJ referred to its judgment in Schmidberger and confirmed that the protection of fundamental rights justifies, in principle, a restriction upon [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] ECJ referred to its judgment in Schmidberger and confirmed that the protection of fundamental rights justifies, in principle, a restriction upon [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Omega [2004] : EU Case Law</title>
		<link>http://www.eucaselaw.info/schmidberger-2003/comment-page-1/#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>Omega [2004] : EU Case Law</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Jun 2007 19:19:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eucaselaw.info/2007/06/05/schmidberger-2003/#comment-7</guid>
		<description>[...] Schmidberger [2003]  [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Schmidberger [2003]  [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
