header-logo header-logo

23 April 2010
Issue: 7414 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

European Union

Bressol and others v Gouvernement de la Communaute francaise Chaverot and others v Gouvernement de la Communaute francaise C-73/08, [2010] All ER (D) 48 (Apr)

Articles 18 and 21 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union precluded national legislation which limited the number of non-resident students who might enrol for the first time in medical and paramedical courses at higher education establishments, unless the referring court, having assessed all the relevant evidence submitted by the competent authorities, found that that legislation was justified in the light of the objective of protection of public health.

A difference in treatment based indirectly on nationality might be justified by the objective of maintaining a balanced high-quality medical service open to all, in so far as it contributed to achieving a high level of protection of health. It was for the competent national authorities, where they adopted a measure derogating from a principle enshrined by European Union Law, to show in each individual case that that measure was appropriate for securing the attainment of the objective relied upon and

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll