Report 2011 - EFTA Court

laid down in legislation. Therefore, it remains to be examined
whether the requirement may be imposed on grounds of public
policy under Article 3(10) of the PWD. in the Commission’s view,
it is unclear from the facts of the case whether the requirement
confers a genuine benefit on the posted workers concerned which
significantly adds to their social protection and whether the
requirement is proportionate to the public interest pursued. 80 in
any event, in the view of the Commission, the requirement does
not appear to meet the criteria laid down by the ECJ for a public
policy exception. 81
Conclusion
180. in sum, the Commission supports the declaration sought by
ESA in so far as it relates to the failure of iceland to fulfil its
obligations under Article 3 of the PWD.
Per Christiansen
Judge-Rapporteur
80 Reference is made to Finalarte and Others, cited above, paragraph 53.
81 Reference is made to Commission v Luxembourg, cited above, paragraphs 50 to 53.
Case E-12/10 EFTA Surveillance xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Authority v iceland
200