Distanshandel med alkohol – En undersökning av hur EU-rätten avgränsar Sveriges möjlighet till nationell reglering
(2020) LAGF03 20202Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Uppsatsen behandlar svensk reglering av distanshandel med alkohol ur ett överstatligt perspektiv. Rättsdogmatisk och EU-rättslig metod tillämpas för att fastställa gällande rätt och undersöka hur unionsrätten avgränsar Sveriges möjlighet att lagstifta om distanshandel till skydd för det svenska alkoholmonopolet på bekostnad av den fria rörligheten för varor. Den fria rörligheten för varor är en stark unionsrättslig huvudregel. Genom artikel 37 FEUF kan statliga handelsmonopol undantagsvis tolereras.
Europeiska Unionens domstol (fortsättningsvis EU-domstolen) har medlemsstaterna inte kan förbjuda distansköp, det vill säga distanshandel där köparen ordnar transporten. Om detsamma gäller distansförsäljning, där säljaren ordnar med... (More) - Uppsatsen behandlar svensk reglering av distanshandel med alkohol ur ett överstatligt perspektiv. Rättsdogmatisk och EU-rättslig metod tillämpas för att fastställa gällande rätt och undersöka hur unionsrätten avgränsar Sveriges möjlighet att lagstifta om distanshandel till skydd för det svenska alkoholmonopolet på bekostnad av den fria rörligheten för varor. Den fria rörligheten för varor är en stark unionsrättslig huvudregel. Genom artikel 37 FEUF kan statliga handelsmonopol undantagsvis tolereras.
Europeiska Unionens domstol (fortsättningsvis EU-domstolen) har medlemsstaterna inte kan förbjuda distansköp, det vill säga distanshandel där köparen ordnar transporten. Om detsamma gäller distansförsäljning, där säljaren ordnar med transporten, har däremot inte prövats.
Svensk reglering av distanshandel är otydlig. Vagheten är problematisk ur ett legalitetsperspektiv då det är brottsligt att förfara i strid mot svensk alkoholreglering, vilket talar för att förtydligande svensk lag kommer stiftas. Regeringskansliet behandlar sedan år 2016 ett förslag om att förbjuda distansförsäljning. I ett avgörande från oktober 2020 likställde Patent- och marknadsdomstolen distansförsäljning med Systembolagets monopolverksamhet. Skulle detta likhetstecken befästas med prejudikatsvärde vid en prövning av Högsta Domstolen förbjuds distansförsäljning utan att ny lag behöver stiftas.
Slutsatsen blir att unionsrätten i dagsläget uttryckligen avgränsar svensk reglering av distanshandel mellan distansköp och distansförsäljning. EU-domstolen har inte fastslagit något hinder för ett förbud mot distansförsäljning på motsvarande sätt som vid distansköp. Vid en prövning av EU- domstolen har Sverige emellertid att bevisa att ett sådant förbud är försvarligt. Olika teorier finns om huruvida EU-domstolen skulle pröva ett sådant förbud mot artikel 37 FEUF eller göra en allmän proportionalitetsbedömning. Det tidigare alternativet talar för att ett förbud skulle kunna tolereras, det senare talar för motsatt slutsats. (Less) - Abstract
- This thesis addresses Swedish regulation on distance selling of alcohol from a supranational perspective. European Union legal method and legal dogmatic method are used to determine applicable law and to inquire into the delimitations that Union law creates for the Swedish ability to regulate distance selling of alcohol.
The free movement of goods is a principal rule in Union law. A derogation in Article 37 TFEU provides an opportunity to have national state monopolies of goods approved by Union law. Thus the Swedish monopoly on alcohol retail has been accepted due to protection of public health. However, The European Court of Justice has prohibited a ban on distance selling of alcohol where the customer arranges the delivery of the... (More) - This thesis addresses Swedish regulation on distance selling of alcohol from a supranational perspective. European Union legal method and legal dogmatic method are used to determine applicable law and to inquire into the delimitations that Union law creates for the Swedish ability to regulate distance selling of alcohol.
The free movement of goods is a principal rule in Union law. A derogation in Article 37 TFEU provides an opportunity to have national state monopolies of goods approved by Union law. Thus the Swedish monopoly on alcohol retail has been accepted due to protection of public health. However, The European Court of Justice has prohibited a ban on distance selling of alcohol where the customer arranges the delivery of the goods. Whether the ruling encompass distance selling where the retailer arranges the delivery is yet to be examined by the Court.
The legality of distance selling of alcohol is not clearly expressed in Swedish alcohol regulations. Nor is it explicitly forbidden. This ambiguity is problematic from a legality perspective considering that violations of Swedish alcohol regulations are considered criminal offenses. A change in regulations that would prohibit distance selling where the retailer arranges the delivery is under deliberation by the Swedish Government. In a ruling from October 2020 the Swedish national Patent and Market Court equate distance selling with retail. Should the Swedish supreme court affirm this equation, distance selling would be prohibited without any legislation needed.
In conclusion, Union law delimits Sweden's legislative power on distance selling of alcohol when the customer arranges the delivery of the goods. There are indications that a ban on distance selling where the retailer arranges the transport is beyond the limits of Swedens legislative power as well. The Member State which takes measures contrary to the regulation on free movement of goods has the burden of proving that the measure is compatible with Union law. Whether the Court would find such a ban permissible would most likely depend on if the ban would be assessed in the light of article 37 TFEU or with consideration of the principle of proportionality. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9034659
- author
- Södergren, Tyra LU
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20202
- year
- 2020
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- EU-rätt, EU law, marknadsrätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9034659
- date added to LUP
- 2021-02-09 11:07:44
- date last changed
- 2021-02-09 11:07:44
@misc{9034659,
abstract = {{This thesis addresses Swedish regulation on distance selling of alcohol from a supranational perspective. European Union legal method and legal dogmatic method are used to determine applicable law and to inquire into the delimitations that Union law creates for the Swedish ability to regulate distance selling of alcohol.
The free movement of goods is a principal rule in Union law. A derogation in Article 37 TFEU provides an opportunity to have national state monopolies of goods approved by Union law. Thus the Swedish monopoly on alcohol retail has been accepted due to protection of public health. However, The European Court of Justice has prohibited a ban on distance selling of alcohol where the customer arranges the delivery of the goods. Whether the ruling encompass distance selling where the retailer arranges the delivery is yet to be examined by the Court.
The legality of distance selling of alcohol is not clearly expressed in Swedish alcohol regulations. Nor is it explicitly forbidden. This ambiguity is problematic from a legality perspective considering that violations of Swedish alcohol regulations are considered criminal offenses. A change in regulations that would prohibit distance selling where the retailer arranges the delivery is under deliberation by the Swedish Government. In a ruling from October 2020 the Swedish national Patent and Market Court equate distance selling with retail. Should the Swedish supreme court affirm this equation, distance selling would be prohibited without any legislation needed.
In conclusion, Union law delimits Sweden's legislative power on distance selling of alcohol when the customer arranges the delivery of the goods. There are indications that a ban on distance selling where the retailer arranges the transport is beyond the limits of Swedens legislative power as well. The Member State which takes measures contrary to the regulation on free movement of goods has the burden of proving that the measure is compatible with Union law. Whether the Court would find such a ban permissible would most likely depend on if the ban would be assessed in the light of article 37 TFEU or with consideration of the principle of proportionality.}},
author = {{Södergren, Tyra}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Distanshandel med alkohol – En undersökning av hur EU-rätten avgränsar Sveriges möjlighet till nationell reglering}},
year = {{2020}},
}