Skip to content

GlobalLawDBby GenieAI

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Search the text of the law

Log in Get an API key

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Log in Get an API key

The Global Law Database. Free to read, built for people and AI agents.

Explore

All laws
Search the text
Sanctions
Map of connections
Compare UK and EU

Developers

AI agents (MCP)
REST API
Bulk data
API keys

Coverage

United Kingdom
European Union
United States
Canada
Australia
France
Germany
Netherlands
Spain
Austria
Norway
Finland
Switzerland
Ireland

GlobalLawDB is made by GenieAI, London. It is not legal advice: check the official text before relying on it. Text comes from official publishers under their licences, listed on the Data page.

ThemeMatch my systemLightDark

European Union
Kaj Lyyski v Umeå universitet (C-40/05)
Judgment
The questions
34

Kaj Lyyski v Umeå universitet (C-40/05)

Judgment of 11 Jan 2007law://eu/cjeu/2005/c-40-05/para_34@2026-11-10

34As far as the freedom of movement for workers is concerned, that principle is implemented and given specific effect by Article 39(2) EC. There is therefore no need to express a view on Article 12 EC (Weigel, paragraphs 58 and 59).

Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Third Chamber
Case: C-40/05 · ECLI:EU:C:2007:10
Decided: 11 Jan 2007
Procedure: Preliminary reference · referred by the Överklagandenämnden för högskolan (Sweden)
Applicant: Kaj Lyyski
Defendant: Umeå universitet
Rapporteur: J. Malenovský
Advocate General: C. Stix-Hackl
Bench: 3 judges
A. Rosas, A. Borg Barthet, J. Malenovský
Language: Swedish
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62005CJ0040

Topics

Education, vocational training, youth and sport Freedom of movement for workers Non-discrimination on grounds of nationality Principles of Union law

History · 1 version

11 Jan 2007Reading

Connections

Cited by 5: Hans-Dieter Jundt and Hedwig Jundt v Finanzamt Offenburg (C-281/06)2 provisions; Schiebel Aircraft GmbH v Bundesminister für Wirtschaft, Familie und Jugend (C-474/12); Michael Neukirchinger v Bezirkshauptmannschaft Grieskirchen (C-382/08)2 provisions; Unión de Televisiones Comerciales Asociadas (UTECA) v Administración General del Estado (C-222/07); R. H. H. Renneberg v Staatssecretaris van Financiën (C-527/06)
Cites 18: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016)5 provisions; Union royale belge des sociétés de football association ASBL v Jean-Marc Bosman, Royal club liégeois SA v Jean-Marc Bosman and others and Union des associations européennes de football (UEFA) v Jean-Marc Bosman (C-415/93); J. Knoors v Staatssecretaris van Economische Zaken (C-115/78); Rijksinstituut voor de sociale verzekering des zelfstandigen (RSVZ) v Heinrich Wolf and NV Microtherm Europe and others (154/87, 155/87); Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium (C-65/03); Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium (42/87); Marie-Nathalie D'Hoop v Office national de l'emploi (C-224/98); Gerhard Köbler v Republik Österreich (C-224/01); Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Austria (C-147/03); Dieter Kraus v Land Baden-Württemberg (C-19/92); Volker Graf v Filzmoser Maschinenbau GmbH (C-190/98); AMOK Verlags GmbH v A & R Gastronomie GmbH (C-289/02); F.C. Terhoeve v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst Particulieren/Ondernemingen buitenland (C-18/95); Karl Robert Kranemann v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen (C-109/04); Vincent Blaizot v University of Liège and others (24/86); Ministre de l'Intérieur v Aitor Oteiza Olazabal (C-100/01); Harald Weigel and Ingrid Weigel v Finanzlandesdirektion für Vorarlberg (C-387/01); Françoise Gravier v City of Liège (293/83)