# The EU four freedoms: free movement overview

> **Key takeaway:** Goods 34–36 (Dassonville/Cassis/Keck). Persons/workers 45 + citizenship 21. Establishment 49; services 56; capital 63. Restrictions need justification + proportionality. UK: largely historical domestically — see TCA/REUL.

- **Jurisdiction:** England & Wales
- **Practice area:** Public Law
- **Last reviewed:** 2026-08-04
- **Interactive page:** https://kttclegal.info/library/notes/PublicLaw/eu-four-freedoms
- **Keywords:** four freedoms, free movement of goods, Dassonville, Cassis de Dijon, free movement of persons, services, capital, single market

## What is this about?

The single market was built on free movement of goods, persons, services, and capital. For UK practitioners these rules are largely historical as domestic EU free-movement rights, but they still illuminate equality, services, and trade case law, and matter when advising on EU-facing transactions or Northern Ireland/TCA trade frictions.

## What is the core rule?

Goods: quantitative restrictions and measures having equivalent effect are prohibited (TFEU Arts 34–36 lineage), subject to mandatory requirements and treaty derogations (Cassis de Dijon; Keck refinements). Persons: free movement of workers and Union citizenship rights (Arts 45, 21) with equal treatment and limited public-policy derogations. Services and establishment: Arts 49 and 56 protect cross-border economic activity. Capital: Art 63 liberalises movements of capital, with prudential exceptions. Justifications must be proportionate.

## What are the elements or test?

1. Which freedom is engaged (goods/persons/services/capital)?
2. Is there a restriction/MEE or discrimination?
3. Treaty derogation or judicial mandatory requirement?
4. Proportionality of the measure?
5. UK today: is any residual domestic/TCA rule still relevant?

## Which authorities matter?

- **Procureur du Roi v Dassonville (Case 8/74); Rewe-Zentral (Cassis de Dijon) (Case 120/78)** — Foundational goods free-movement case law on MEEs and mutual recognition themes.
- **Keck and Mithouard (Cases C-267/91 & C-268/91)** — Limits certain selling arrangements from automatic Art 34 capture.
- **TFEU Arts 21, 34–36, 45, 49, 56, 63 (as applicable pre-exit)** — Treaty architecture of the four freedoms and citizenship free movement.

## How does this apply in practice?

Post-Brexit UK–EU goods/services mobility is primarily TCA and domestic immigration/trade law, not classic free movement. Use this note for acquis literacy and comparative analysis.

## What are common pitfalls?

- Advising clients as if free movement of persons still applies to UK nationals in the EU without TCA/settled-status nuance
- Over-applying Dassonville without Keck/justification analysis in historical problems
- Ignoring purely internal situations doctrine in old EU case law

## When would a practitioner use this?

Decoding single-market case law; trade advisory background; EU law teaching/reference.

## Quick reference

Goods 34–36 (Dassonville/Cassis/Keck). Persons/workers 45 + citizenship 21. Establishment 49; services 56; capital 63. Restrictions need justification + proportionality. UK: largely historical domestically — see TCA/REUL.

---

*Reference material from [KTTC Legal](https://kttclegal.info/), not legal advice. Work product supports instructing solicitors and barristers under their supervision. England & Wales.*