This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document E2001P0002
Request for an Advisory Opinion from the EFTA Court by Verwaltungsbeschwerdeinstanz des Fürstentums Liechtenstein (Administrative Court for the Principality of Liechtenstein) by decision of that court of 12 March 2001 in the case of Dr Martin Franz Pucher (Case E-2/01)
Request for an Advisory Opinion from the EFTA Court by Verwaltungsbeschwerdeinstanz des Fürstentums Liechtenstein (Administrative Court for the Principality of Liechtenstein) by decision of that court of 12 March 2001 in the case of Dr Martin Franz Pucher (Case E-2/01)
Request for an Advisory Opinion from the EFTA Court by Verwaltungsbeschwerdeinstanz des Fürstentums Liechtenstein (Administrative Court for the Principality of Liechtenstein) by decision of that court of 12 March 2001 in the case of Dr Martin Franz Pucher (Case E-2/01)
JO C 242, 30.8.2001, p. 5–5
(ES, DA, DE, EL, EN, FR, IT, NL, PT, FI, SV)
Request for an Advisory Opinion from the EFTA Court by Verwaltungsbeschwerdeinstanz des Fürstentums Liechtenstein (Administrative Court for the Principality of Liechtenstein) by decision of that court of 12 March 2001 in the case of Dr Martin Franz Pucher (Case E-2/01)
Official Journal C 242 , 30/08/2001 P. 0005 - 0005
Request for an Advisory Opinion from the EFTA Court by Verwaltungsbeschwerdeinstanz des Fürstentums Liechtenstein (Administrative Court for the Principality of Liechtenstein) by decision of that court of 12 March 2001 in the case of Dr Martin Franz Pucher (Case E-2/01) (2001/C 242/08) A request has been made to the EFTA Court by decision of 12 March 2001 of Verwaltungsbeschwerdeinstanz des Fürstentums Liechtenstein (Administrative Court for the Principality of Liechtenstein), which was received at the Court Registry on 14 March 2001, for an Advisory Opinion in the case of Dr Martin Franz Pucher, on the following questions: 1. Does the residence requirement imposed by Article 180(a)(1) of the PGR constitute overt or covert discrimination on grounds of nationality, within the meaning of Article 4 EEA, alternatively, does that residence requirement constitute a restriction on the freedom of establishment provided for by Article 31 EEA? 2. If the answer to question 1 is in the affirmative: is the discrimination or restriction justified on public-interest grounds, in particular those of public policy and/or public security (see Article 33 EEA)?