Judgment_paragraph 118 · Valev Visnapuu v Kihlakunnansyyttäjä (Helsinki) and Suomen valtio

118However, if that measure is within the field of public health, account must be taken of the fact that the health and life of humans rank foremost among the assets and interests protected by the Treaty and that it is for the Member States to determine the level of protection which they wish to afford to public health and the way in which that level is to be achieved. Since the level may vary from one Member State to another, Member States should be allowed a measure of discretion (judgment in Ker-Optika, C‑108/09, EU:C:2010:725, paragraph 58 and the case-law cited, and, to that effect, judgment in Ahokainen and Leppik, C‑434/04, EU:C:2006:609, paragraphs 32 and 33).

Valev Visnapuu v Kihlakunnansyyttäjä (Helsinki) and Suomen valtio - Tullihallitus (C-198/14)

Key facts

History · 1 version

Connections