iii. Application of ECJ case law
　　a. Abolishing duplicated control by importing MS (Case C-162/97, Nilson)
　　b. As far as food addictive is concerned, in the absence of medical proof and where the effects or safe intake of an addictive are uncertain, a MS may take action.
　　However, an addictive must be authorised by importing MS where the addictive concerned (1) does not present a risk to public health and (2) meets a real technical need in view (3) of the finding of international scientific research and (4) consumer habits of the importing MS.
　　In addition, the importing MS may not argue that because it is possible to make the product without the additive, there is no technical need for its incorporation in the product. (Case C-178/84 Commission vs. Germany)
　　c. Food for thought: (what is the scope of public health?)
　　(1) Public health and environmental protection
　　According to Article 174, a general borderline is that, were economic issues not involved, a measure could in principle be justified on general environmental grounds.
　　But …
　　(2) Public health contains consumer protection
　　In Case C-188/84 Commission vs. France, France set up stringent standards for wood working machines which were considered incompatible with Article 28 by the Commission. ECJ held that French rules were to appropriately protect public health and therefore dismissed the Commission’s application.　
　　In Case C-50/85 Schloh vs. Auto Controle Technique, ECJ held that Belgian rules on compulsory roadworthiness checks for second-hand cars were justified by the reason of public health under Article 30.　
　　(2) Public health under rule of reason
　　It may be notable that derogation based on public health can either be justified according to Article 30 or rule of reason.
　　See, Case C-120/78, Cassis de Dijon
　　8.　In the absence of common rules relating to the production and marketing of alcohol [...] obstacles to movement within the Community resulting from disparities between the national laws relating to the marketing of the products in question must be accepted in so far as those provisions may be recognized as being necessary in order to satisfy mandatory requirements relating in particular to the effectiveness of fiscal supervision, the protection of public health, the fairness of commercial transactions and the defence of the consumer.

第 [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] 页 共[7]页