Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
(Freedom to provide services - Temporary deployment of workers for the purposes of performing a contract - Restrictions)
REFERENCE to the Court under Article 177 of the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) by the Tribunal Correctionnel de Huy (Belgium) for a preliminary ruling in the criminal proceedings pending before that court against Jean-Claude Arblade, Arblade & Fils SARL, as the party civilly liable (C-369/96), and Bernard Leloup, Serge Leloup, Sofrage SARL, as the party civilly liable (C-376/96),
on the interpretation of Articles 59 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 49 EC) and 60 of the EC Treaty (now Article 50 EC), THE COURT,
composed of: G.C. Rodr�guez Iglesias, President, J.C. Moitinho de Almeida, D.A.O. Edward (Rapporteur) and R. Schintgen (Presidents of Chambers), J.-P. Puissochet, G. Hirsch, P. Jann, H. Ragnemalm and M. Wathelet, Judges, Advocate General: D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Registrar: D. Louterman-Hubeau, Principal Administrator,
(see, in particular, S�ger , paragraph 15, Case C-19/92 Kraus v Land Baden-W�rttemberg [1993] ECR I-1663 , paragraph 32, Case C-55/94 Gebhard v Consiglio dell'Ordine degli Avvocati e Procurati di Milano [1995] ECR I-4165 , paragraph 37, and Guiot , cited above, paragraphs 11 and 13).
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.