Welfare across borders: solidarity, equality and free movement (LEVEL)

• Bø, Øyvind (2026). Lawful residence as a condition for access to social security benefits. European Journal of Social Security (EJSS). 28(3), p. 261–261. doi: 10.1177/13882627261445377. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The equal treatment provision in Article 4 of the Social Security Regulation does not refer to the conditions for lawful residence in the Citizenship Directive. The CJEU has nevertheless applied lawful residence as a condition for the right to equal treatment in cases concerning economically inactive Union citizens claiming social security benefits in the host Member State. Critics contend that the requirement of lawful residence in respect of claims for social security benefits lacks a legal foundation and was motivated by political concerns about welfare tourism and the sustainability of national welfare systems. This article shows that the application of the requirement of lawful residence in this field is legally justifiable and principled. It is a matter of applying the fundamental principle of equal treatment, which is inherently linked to lawful residence. The article examines the relationship between the Regulation and the Directive, the compatibility of a national condition on lawful residence with the provisions on applicable legislation in the Regulation and the consistency of case law. It argues for a limited scope of the requirement of lawful residence in the field of social security.

• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Bø, Øyvind (2026). ‘Objectively comparable’? The free movement of persons within the European Economic Area. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law (MJ). 33(1), p. 54–54. doi: 10.1177/1023263x261421836. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Article 1 EEA establishes a ‘homogeneous European Economic Area’ that entails ‘the free movement of persons’. Nationals of the EEA EFTA States are afforded rights of movement and residence, regardless of whether they are economically active. The CJEU has characterized the legal status of EEA nationals as ‘objectively comparable’ with that of EU citizens. Differences between the rights protection afforded in the EEA EFTA pillar and the EU pillar will constitute discrimination. EU secondary legislation that pursues the aim of the fullest possible realization of the free movement of persons falls within the scope of Article 1 EEA and shall be implemented through Articles 98 and 102 EEA. The detailed regulation provided for by such measures makes Article 1(2)b EEA sufficiently precise and unconditional to be relied upon before courts. It affords EEA EFTA nationals a primary, written and individual right to free movement that is homogeneous with Article 21.1 TFEU.

• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Andenæs, Mads (2025). Kontinentalsoklene i Norges fire avtaler med EU. Lov og Rett. 64(5), p. 291–313. doi: 10.18261/lor.64.5.3. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  EØS-avtalens anvendelsesområde fastlegges etter funksjonelle kriterier som i EU-retten. Rekkevidden sammenfaller med EØS-medlemsstatenes suverenitet og jurisdiksjon. EØS-avtalen anvendes på samme måte på alle EØS-landenes kontinentalsokler. I denne artikkelen underbygger vi standpunktet ved å analysere avtalene om EU-medlemskap fra 1972 og 1994, Frihandelsavtalen mellom Norge og EF fra 1973, EØS-avtalen – og regjeringens redegjørelser for disse fire avtalene til Stortinget. Stortingsflertallet har vært kjent med EU-rettens funksjonelle tilnærming. Denne ligger til grunn for samtlige av Norges avtaler, både som rettslig premiss, og som politisk ønsket. Ingen av Norges fire avtaler med EU oppstiller en geografisk avgrensning. Alle kommer etter vanlig tolkning til anvendelse på norsk kontinentalsokkel. Strategien som ligger til grunn for Norges standpunkt, ble utpenslet av Jens Evensen i 1971. Konsekvent og uten unntak har skiftende regjeringer og stortingsflertall holdt fast ved den, helt frem til nytolkingen i Stortingsmelding nr. 5 (2012–2013) om at EØS-avtalen skal gjelde på EU-statenes kontinentalsokler, men ikke tilsvarende på soklene til EFTA-statene Norge og Island.

• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2025). Why not the Charter? Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law (MJ). 32(2), p. 213–236. doi: 10.1177/1023263x251341679. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA) extends the internal market of the EU to Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. The special relationship is predicated on a set of common constitutional values and traditions that allow an area without internal borders to be created and maintained. Within the EEA EU pillar, the association agreement constitutes an integral part of Union law. Its application will trigger the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. Within the EEA EFTA pillar, the EFTA Court still resorts to the European Convention on Human Rights. Its approach resembles the jurisprudence of the ECJ before the entry into force of the Charter. The current lack of homogeneity rejects the common values upon which the association agreement is founded and undermines the foreseeability that is the prerequisite for a ‘practical and effective’ protection of fundamental rights. It is time to recognize the Charter as an expression of general principles that are intrinsic to the structure and objectives of EEA law.

• Petti, Alessandro; Hillion, Christophe & Bekkedal, Tarjei (2025). Fundamental Rights protection in Europe: Shedding light on a system of interrelated regimes. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law (MJ). 32(2), p. 110–110. doi: 10.1177/1023263x251342875. Full text in Research Archive
• Petti, Alessandro (2025). External dimensions of EU data protection law : the legal and the political. italian Journal of Public Law. 17(1), p. 139–172. Full text in Research Archive
• Bø, Øyvind (2025). Virkeliggjøringen av fri bevegelighet for personer i EØS. Lov og Rett. 64(1), p. 7–33. doi: 10.18261/lor.64.1.3. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  EØS-avtalen utvider det indre marked til EØS/EFTA-landene. Ifølge EØS-avtalen artikkel 1 omfatter utvidelsen det indre markeds «fri bevegelighet for personer». Artikkelen viser hvordan prinsippet om fri bevegelighet virkeliggjøres gjennom rettighetsbestemmelser i EØS-avtalens hoveddel og sekundærlovgivning. Prinsippet omfattet alle personer allerede da EØS-avtalen trådte i kraft. Unionsborgerdirektivet var i hovedsak begrenset til å kodifisere eksisterende rettigheter. EØS-avtalen inneholder ikke et motstykke til den generelle retten til fri bevegelighet for unionsborgere i artikkel 21 TEUV. Ved å tolke rettighetsbestemmelsene i lys av prinsippet om fri bevegelighet kan likevel de samme reglene utledes av EØS-avtalen.

• Tandberg, Per Silnes (2025). The conflict rules of European social security coordination in a digital labour market – bridging lex loci laboris and remote work by disregarding marginal cross-border activities. European Journal of Social Security (EJSS). 27(1), p. 25–44. doi: 10.1177/13882627251319638. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The article explores the complexities of determining the social security legislation applicable to employees engaged in cross-border remote work under Title II of Regulation (EC) 883/2004. Using remote work as a case study, it analyses the systematic interplay of various conflict rules. Social security legislation is traditionally tied to the physical location of employment (lex loci laboris), but the rise of remote work disrupts this paradigm, potentially causing frequent shifts in applicable legislation whenever employees work from different Member States. This ‘ping-pong effect’ may undermine legal certainty, impose administrative burdens and jeopardise workers’ social security rights. The article critically evaluates the EU Administrative Commission's Guidance Note on telework, which promotes a flexible interpretation of exceptions under Articles 12, 13 and 16 of Regulation (EC) 883/2004. While these exceptions help to resolve some difficulties, the author argues that the Administrative Commission fails to address the fundamental issue: at what point does cross-border remote work trigger a change in jurisdiction under the main rule in Article 11(3)(a)? The findings suggest that marginal activities – defined as constituting less than 5% of total working time and/or remuneration – should be disregarded within simultaneous and alternating working patterns under lex loci laboris. Such an approach allows the ‘usual’ State of employment to retain jurisdiction, thereby ensuring continuous affiliation for workers. Exclusion of de minimis activities is presented as a proportionate outcome, supported by the fundamental freedoms of free movement in primary EU law.

• Andenæs, Mads (2024). Introduction: Commercial contracts and arbitration at the London Centre for Commercial and Financial Law. In Andenæs, Mads & Heidemann, Maren (Ed.), Commercial Contract Law. From Assignments to Unfair Terms.. Routledge. p. 1–13. doi: 10.4324/9781003463986-1. Full text in Research Archive
• Andenæs, Mads (2024). General Principles at the European Level. In Cananea, Giacinto & Auby, Jean-Bernard (Ed.), General Principles and Sector-Specific Rules in European Administrative Laws. Oxford University Press. p. 257–273. doi: 10.1093/oso/9780198867579.003.0016. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Andenæs, Mads (2024). EØS-avtalen og kontinentalsoklene. Lov og Rett. doi: 10.18261/lor.63.1.3. Full text in Research Archive
• Baetens, Freya & Crawford, James (2024). Creation of States: Influence and Legacy. In Lyons, Donna (Eds.), Leading Works in International Law. Routledge. Full text in Research Archive
• Andenæs, Mads & Meyer, Johannes Hygen (2024). Utenlandske rettskilder. Jussens Venner. 59(6), p. 372–412. doi: 10.18261/jv.59.6.2. Full text in Research Archive
• Baetens, Freya & Zhang, Sheng (2024). China: An Emerging Rule-maker in International Investment Law? In Rasilla, Ignacio de la & Cai, Congyan (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of China and International Law. Cambridge University Press. p. 423–449. Full text in Research Archive
• Shuibhne, Niamh Nic (2023). Applying solidarity as a procedural obligation in EU citizenship law. Croatian Yearbook of European Law & Policy. 19(1), p. 1–38. doi: 10.3935/cyelp.19.2023.523. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Building on recent EU case law, which underlines that a commitment to solidarity in the European context produces concrete legal obligations, this paper highlights that solidarity has procedural as well as normative and substantive dimensions. It then explores the potential of procedural solidarity in the context of Union citizenship and, more specifically, the free movement of Union citizens. The overall objective is to consider if the conception of solidarity as a procedural obligation under EU law can provide fresh ways to think about persisting challenges around freedom of movement. Procedural solidarity emphasises the fair sharing of responsibility, including financial responsibility, when implementing EU objectives and the taking of decisions collectively, respecting the general requirements of EU law. Fundamentally, while adherence to procedural solidarity might not produce significantly different outcomes in contested areas of EU citizenship law, it would strengthen the decision-making processes that deliver those outcomes, cultivating, in turn, better accountability for the choices made by both EU and national institutions.

• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2023). Book Review: The Boundaries of the EU Internal Market: Participation without Membership By Marja-Liisa Öberg, (Cambridge University Press, 2020). Common market law review. doi: 10.54648/cola2023037. Full text in Research Archive
• Baetens, Freya (2023). The independence and impartiality of adjudicators in regional courts. In Cordero-Moss, Giuditta (Eds.), Independence and Impartiality of International Adjudicators. Intersentia. p. 283–301. Full text in Research Archive
• Sweet, Alec Stone & Andenæs, Mads (2023). The Law and Politics of the General Principles of Law in the Twenty-First Century. Columbia journal of transnational law. 62(1), p. 1–57. Full text in Research Archive
• Bø, Øyvind & Furuholmen, Lucy Isabelle Klæboe (2023). Høyesteretts dom i dagpengesaken – en vurdering av begrunnelsen for ikke å fravike EFTA-domstolens tolkning av trygdeforordningen. Jussens Venner. 58(4), p. 304–342. doi: 10.18261/jv.58.4.3. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Mange har ventet i stor spenning på Høyesteretts avklaring av forholdet mellom vilkåret om opphold i Norge for rett til dagpenger etter folketrygdloven og EØS-avtalen. I HR-2023-301-A Dagpenger konkluderer Høyesterett med at oppholdskravet er forenelig med EØS-avtalen. Høyesterett legger til grunn EFTA-domstolens tolkning av trygdeforordningen i de rådgivende uttalelsene i sakene E-13/20 O mot Arbeids- og velferdsdirektoratet og E-15/20 Straffesak mot P. Artikkelen undersøker hvordan Høyesterett vurderer om det foreligger «gode og tungtveiende grunner» for å fravike EFTA-domstolens tolkning. Den konkluderer med at Høyesterett i liten grad imøtegår innvendingene som har kommet mot EFTA-domstolens uttalelse. Domstolen burde ha foretatt en mer inngående vurdering av om EFTA-domstolens tolkning kan forenes med det øvrige rettskildematerialet.

• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Andenæs, Mads (2022). Er mottakere av dagpenger beskyttet av EØS-avtalens grunnleggende rett til fri bevegelighet? Lov og Rett. 61(3), p. 145–169. doi: 10.18261/lor.61.3.3. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  I sykepengesaken/NAV-saken fastslo EFTA domstolen og Høyesterett at folketrygdlovens oppholdskrav for mottakere av sykepenger er i strid med EØS-avtalen. Grunnlaget er dobbelt: EØS-avtalens hoveddel beskytter enhver tjenestemottakers rett til fri bevegelighet. Trygdeforordningen (883/2004) beskytter sykepengemottakeres rett til å eksportere sykepenger. Folketrygdloven oppstiller tilsvarende oppholdskrav for mottakere av dagpenger. I to rådgivende uttalelser fra juni 2021 konkluderte EFTA-domstolen motsatt av i sykepengesaken. Den la til grunn at trygdeforordningens særregler om ytelser ved arbeidsledighet ikke forbyr nasjonale oppholdskrav. I tillegg mente EFTA-domstolen at reglene om dagpenger i trygdeforordningen fullharmoniserer arbeidslediges bevegelsesfrihet, slik at rettighetene i EØS-avtalens hoveddel ikke kommer til anvendelse. Artikkelen forsvarer et motsatt standpunkt. Det er sikker rett at trygdeforordningens formål er begrenset til koordinering. Vilkårene for å motta og opprettholde trygdeytelser er det medlemsstatene som bestemmer. Måten dette handlingsrommet utøves på, ligger utenfor forordningen. Nasjonalt fastsatte oppholdskrav må sammenholdes med den grunnleggende retten til fri bevegelighet i EØS-avtalens hoveddel og proporsjonalitetsprinsippet.

• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2022). On an equal footing. The EFTA Court’s ruling in the Norwegian Social Security scandal: Criminal proceedings against N. Common market law review. doi: 10.54648/cola2022011. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2022). The Application of EU Internal Competences in an External Context: UK v Council (EEA). In Butler, Graham & Wessel, Ramses A. (Ed.), EU External Relations Law: The Cases in Context. Hart Publishing Ltd. doi: 10.5040/9781509939725.ch-065. Full text in Research Archive
• Petti, Alessandro (2022). EU COVID-19 purchase and export mechanism: A framework for EU operational autonomy. Common market law review. 59(5), p. 1333–1370. doi: 10.54648/cola2022094. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The burgeoning debate on EU strategic autonomy calls for an appraisal of the role of law in the pursuit of the EU’s strategic objectives. This article examines EU executive measures regarding procurement and free movement regulation of critical resources and vaccines in the wake of the COVID-19 outbreak. It introduces the notion of EU operational autonomy to account for the mixed operative framework governing the joint actions of the Union and its Member States.The article argues that this framework heralds new patterns of executive centralization whereby political motives increasingly inform legal structures. It identifies the internal and external facets of EU operational autonomy, and highlights the composite dynamics emerging from neighbouring country association to EU operational autonomy. The study of these dynamics also offers insights into the complex balance between the EU’s regional and multilateral commitments. EU procurement; EU trade rules; COVID-19 vaccines; mixed executive frameworks; operational autonomy

• Andenæs, Mads & Bekkedal, Tarjei (2022). The reach of jobseeker rights to free movement: On the complementary relationship between primary and secondary law. Oslo Law Review. 9(1), p. 4–25. doi: 10.18261/olr.9.1.1. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The reach of jobseeker rights to free movement depends on the relationship between norms at different levels of European Union (EU) law. The default methodological approach to these norms misapplies the conflict of norms doctrine in constitutional theory. Rights are read down based on an analysis of how the norms relate to, reinforce or otherwise affect each other as parts of a hierarchical whole. We advance a different approach and take as our starting point that the fundamental status of a jobseeker is that of Union citizen. Union citizens have a plethora of rights that are complementary. Citizens may optimise their legal position by invoking, or not invoking, rights. In the first place, courts and other judicial authorities must make sense of the actual choice made by the Union citizen rather than any abstract hierarchy of norms. We analyse the rights of jobseekers to reside in the host state, to export unemployment benefits for a period greater than the three months granted by Regulation 883/2004, and to retain unemployment benefits when they stay in a state other than the competent state without any intention of seeking work there. Our approach shows that the Court of Justice of the EU has resolved these matters in an entirely coherent manner.

View all works in NVA

• Petti, Alessandro (2024). EU Neighbourhood law: Wider Europe and the extended EU's legal space. Hart Publishing Ltd. 304 p. Full text in Research Archive

View all works in NVA

• Baetens, Freya (2024). Comparative Study and Internal and External Guides on Amicable Settlement for the EU-funded African Governance Architecture Support Project. African Court for Human and People's Rights. Full text in Research Archive

View all works in NVA

• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2025). EU straffer Norge. [TV]. nrk. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2025). Det er ikke EU som bryter EØS-avtalen, det er Norge. doi: https:/www.dn.no/innlegg/toll/proteksjonisme/handelskrig/det-er-ikke-eu-som-bryter-eos-avtalen-det-er-norge/2-1-1906400. Full text in Research Archive
• Bø, Øyvind; Sætervadet, Torkell & Bekkedal, Tarjei (2025). Høyesterett anerkjenner en generell rett til fri bevegelighet i EØS. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Storkammeravgjørelsen avslutter striden om rekkevidden av bevegelsesfriheten for økonomisk inaktive personer.

• Bø, Øyvind; Sætervadet, Torkell & Bekkedal, Tarjei (2025). På tide å erkjenne at personer har rett til fri bevegelighet i EØS. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  Det har blitt hevdet at «fri bevegelighet for personer» var begrenset til økonomisk aktive da EØS-avtalen ble inngått. Dette er ikke riktig.

• Bø, Øyvind; Sætervadet, Torkell & Bekkedal, Tarjei (2025). En generell rett til fri bevegelighet for personer i EØS. Full text in Research Archive
• Bø, Øyvind; Sætervadet, Torkell & Bekkedal, Tarjei (2025). Høyesteretts anerkjenner fri bevegelighet for økonomisk inaktive personer i HR-2025-490-S (MH). Full text in Research Archive
• Bø, Øyvind (2025). Høyesterett dropper kravet om uførhet på uføretidspunktet (HR-2024-2092-A). Tidsskrift for erstatningsrett, forsikringsrett og trygderett. doi: 10.18261/teft.22.1.3. Full text in Research Archive
• Bø, Øyvind (2024). Trygderetten er den viktigste rettssikkerhetsgarantisten på trygdeområdet. Full text in Research Archive
• Andenæs, Mads & Meyer, Johannes Hygen (2024). Hvorfor ikke bruke alle rettskildene? Lov og Rett. 63(2), p. 142–145. Full text in Research Archive
• Andenæs, Mads (2024). AI liability and general principles of EU law. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  The role of principles of EU law and European private law in the digital transition and for AI liability. How principles of EU law and European private law can further develop liability as a matter of EU law.

• Andenæs, Mads (2024). «Effektiv gjennomføring av homogene regler i EØS» Handlingsrommet og EØS. Innlegg. Partnerforums seminar. Full text in Research Archive Show summary

  «Effektiv gjennomføring av homogene regler i EØS» Handlingsromsdoktrinen var misforstått og ideologisk/ nasjonalistisk begrunnet, men fylte en politisk funksjon. Politisk er den forlatt. Handlingsromsdoktrinen avslører systemsvakheter i norsk sentralforvaltning.

• Bø, Øyvind (2024). Økonomisk inaktive personer i EØS-trygderetten. Full text in Research Archive
• Petti, Alessandro (2024). The structural and the strategic in the EU economic policy after Covid: implications for the EEA. Full text in Research Archive
• Sætervadet, Torkell & Bø, Øyvind (2024). Dagpengesaken – hvor står vi nå? Full text in Research Archive
• Baetens, Freya (2024). Is there a Normative Conflict between International Humanitarian Law and Investment Protection? Full text in Research Archive
• Baetens, Freya (2024). Studying or Shaping Legal Developments? International Law Publications in Times of International Crisis. Full text in Research Archive
• Baetens, Freya (2024). Telenor seeking payout from Myanmar junta in secret arbitration. [Internet]. https://myanmar-now.org/en/news/telenor-seeking-payout-from-. Full text in Research Archive
• Baetens, Freya (2024). The Right to Strike in the Jurisprudence of the European Court Of Human Rights. Full text in Research Archive
• Baetens, Freya (2024). KlimaSeniorinnen v. Switzerland. Full text in Research Archive
• Baetens, Freya (2024). Must the age of the individual end? The push for collective rights in international lawmaking. Full text in Research Archive
• Baetens, Freya (2024). The Use of Cultural Relativism in International Legal Practice. Full text in Research Archive
• Baetens, Freya (2024). China as an emerging law-maker in international law. Full text in Research Archive
• Baetens, Freya (2024). More Equal Than Others? Comment on Humans and the Rights of Other Animals, Comment on Raffael Fasel. Full text in Research Archive
• Baetens, Freya (2024). Nil novi sub sole: Unilateral economic pressure as conflict management. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Andenæs, Mads (2023). Omkamp om omvendt legalitetsprinsipp. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Andenæs, Mads (2023). Fri bevegelighet for personer: Uvilje mot folkevilje. Full text in Research Archive
• Petti, Alessandro (2023). The external dimension of the EU internal market. Full text in Research Archive
• Baetens, Freya (2023). Awards. In Fabri, Helene Ruiz (Eds.), Max Planck Encyclopedia of International Procedural Law. Oxford University Press. Full text in Research Archive
• Baetens, Freya (2023). Transparency across international courts and tribunals. Full text in Research Archive
• Baetens, Freya (2023). Protection of individuals in light of sea-level rise: assessing the work of the ILC. Full text in Research Archive
• Baetens, Freya (2023). Non-adjudicative mechanisms in inter-State dispute resolution: Countering the backlash with a return to the past? Full text in Research Archive
• Baetens, Freya (2023). Interaction between advisory opinion proceedings: procedural and substantive implications. Full text in Research Archive
• Baetens, Freya (2023). Legalising EU foreign policy: a model for China? Full text in Research Archive
• Petti, Alessandro (2022). The EU Covid-19 vaccines purchase and export mechanism: autonomy and solidarity across borders. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Andenæs, Mads (2022). Stortinget kan ikke lovfeste blindsonen. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Andenæs, Mads (2022). Ingen blindsone, men bom. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Andenæs, Mads (2022). Lærte man noe av trygdeskandalen? Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei (2022). Syv jusprofessorer: Hemmelighold kaster skygge over oppryddingen etter Nav-skandalen. [Journal]. Aftenposten morgenutgave trykt. Full text in Research Archive
• Bekkedal, Tarjei & Andenæs, Mads (2022). Ut av blindsonen. Full text in Research Archive
• Petti, Alessandro (2022). The Polisario saga: the principle of good administration and the interface between EU law and international law. In Fromage, Diane (Eds.), Jacques Ziller a European scholar. European University Institute. p. 28–48. doi: 10.2870/098663. Full text in Research Archive

View all works in NVA