The Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) has made it clear that collective action taken by trade unions under certain circumstances might violate the freedom of services and the right of establishment under the Treaty (Articles 49 and 56 TFEU). However, the Court has not addressed the issue of which remedies are to be available against a trade union arranging such an ‘EU-unlawful’ collective action. This question was dealt with by the Swedish Labour Court (Arbetsdomstolen) in its final judgment in December 2009. The article discusses this judgment and presents an alternative understanding of the EU law requirements concerning remedies for EU-unlawful collective actions.
AdlercreutzA. and NyströmB., Labour law in Sweden (Wolters Kluwer2010).
2.
AppsK., ‘Damages claims against trade unions after Viking and Laval’ (2009) 34European Law Review141.
3.
ArnullA., The European Union and its Court of Justice (2nd edn, Oxford University Press2006).
4.
BarnardC., The substantive law of the EU: The four freedoms (3th edn, Oxford University Press2010).
5.
BernitzU. and ReichN., ‘Case No. A 268/04, The Labour Court, Sweden (Arbetsdomstolen) Judgment No. 89/09 of 2 December 2009, Laval un Partneri Ltd. v. Svenska Bygggnadsarbetareförbundet et al’ (2011) 48Common Market Law Review603.
6.
BiondiA. and FarleyM., The right to damages in European law (Wolters Kluwer2009).
7.
CraigP. and De BúrcaG., EU law: Text, cases and materials (4th edn, Oxford University Press2008).
8.
de WitteB., ‘Direct Effect, Primacy and the Nature of the Legal Order’ in CraigP. and De BúrcaG. (eds), The Evolution of EU Law (Oxford University Press2011).
9.
DouganM., National remedies before the Court of Justice: Issues of harmonisation and differentiation (Hart2004).
10.
DouganM., ‘The Vicissitudes of Life at the Coalface: Remedies and Procedures for Enforcing Union Law before the National Courts’ in CraigP. and De BúrcaG. (eds), The Evolution of EU Law (2nd edn, Oxford University Press2011).
11.
EdwardD., ‘Direct Effect – Myth, Mess or Mystery?’ in PrinssenJ.M. and SchrauwenA. (eds), Direct effect: Rethinking a classic of EC legal doctrine (Europa law publishing2002).
12.
HartleyT.C., The foundations of European Union law: An introduction to the constitutional and administrative law of the European Union (7th edn, Oxford University Press2010).
13.
KrennC., ‘A Missing Piece in the Horizontal Effect “Jigsaw”: Horizontal Direct Effect and the Free Movement of Goods’ (2012) Common Market Law Review (2012) 49, 177–215.
14.
KruseA., ‘Arbetsdomstolens dom i Laval – lojal tillämpning av EG-rätten eller vågad egen tillverkning?’ (2010) Europarättslig tidskrift381.
15.
Malmberg J. and others, Effective enforcement of EC labour law (Kluwer Law Int.2003).
16.
NazziniR., ‘Potency and Act of the Principle of Effectiveness: The development of Competition Law Remedies in Community Law’ in BarnardC. and OduduO. (eds), The outer limits of European union law (Hart Publishing2009).
17.
PrechalS., ‘Direct effect, indirect effect, supremacy and the evolving constitution of the European Union’ in BarnardC. (ed), The fundamentals of EU law revisited: Assessing the impact of the constitutional debate (Oxford University Press2007).
18.
RönnmarM., ‘Laval returns to Sweden: The Final Judgment of the Swedish Labour Court and Swedish Legislative Reforms’ (2010) 39Industrial Law Journal280.
19.
RosasA. and ArmatiL., EU constitutional law: An introduction (Hart2010).
20.
WardA., Judicial review and the rights of private parties in EU law (2nd [rev.] edn, Oxford University Press2007).
21.
C-6/90 and C-9/90 Francovich and Others [1991] ECR I-5357.
22.
C-46/93 and C-48/93 Brasserie du Pêcheur and Factortame [1996] ECR I-1029 C-46/93 och C-48/93 Brasserie du Pêcheur och Factortame REG 1996 s I-1029.
C-438/05 The International Transport Workers' Federation and The Finnish Seamen's Union [2007] ECR I-10779 C-438/05 The International Transport Workers' Federation and The Finnish Seamen's Union REG 2007 s I-10779.
32.
C-445/06 Danske Slagterier [2009] ECR I-2119 C-445/06 Danske Slagterier REG 2009 s I-2119.
