Part of: Residents criterion (I-criterion)
The Court of Justice ruling that laid the legal foundation for the I-criterion.
What the case was about
Marc Josémans, operator of coffeeshop Easy Going in Maastricht, challenged the Maastricht private-club model that denied access to non-residents. His argument: refusing visitors from other EU member states conflicts with the free movement of services and goods and with the ban on discrimination by nationality.
What the Court said
In the Josémans ruling (CJEU 16 December 2010, C-137/09) the Court of Justice of the European Union held that a coffeeshop operator cannot invoke free movement for the sale of cannabis: trade in narcotics falls outside the protection of EU law. For the legal part of the turnover — the hospitality activity, such as the sale of drinks and food — free movement of services can apply, but a restriction of it is justified.
The justification is combating drug tourism and the nuisance that accompanies it. According to the Court that is a legitimate objective of public order and public health, and the residents criterion is a suitable and proportionate means to that end.
Why this matters
With this ruling the I-criterion gained a solid European legal foundation. Municipalities and the Prosecution Service could from then on refuse tourists without it qualifying as unlawful discrimination — provided the criterion was applied consistently and proportionately. The Administrative Jurisdiction Division of the Council of State has followed that line in later proceedings on municipal policy.
Importantly: the ruling says a municipality may apply the criterion. Nowhere does it require enforcement. That latitude explains today's differences between municipalities.