CELEX: 62002CJ0085
Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations
Failure to implement Directive 91/439/EC

By an application lodged at the Registry of the Court on 13 March 2002, the Commission of the European Communities brought
an action under Article 226 EC for a declaration that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions
to implement point 12 of Annex II to Council Directive 91/439/EEC of 29 July 1991 on driving licences (OJ 1991 L 237, p. 1,
hereinafter the
Directive), and, in any event, by failing to notify such provisions to it, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations
under that Directive.
Under Article 7(1)(a) of the Directive, the issue of a driving licence is subject,
inter alia
, to the applicant's passing a test of skills and behaviour and a theoretical test, in accordance with the provisions of Annex
II.
Under point 12 of Annex II to the Directive, the time spent driving in order to assess behaviour must in no circumstances
be less than 25 minutes for licences in categories A, B and B + E.
Under Article 12(1) of the Directive, the Member States were, before 1 July 1994, to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative
provisions necessary to comply with the Directive as of 1 July 1996.
In France the average duration of the practical test for obtaining a category B driving licence, which is laid down by administrative
circular, is 22 minutes.
Taking the view that point 12 of Annex II to the Directive had not yet been implemented in French law, the Commission initiated
the infringement procedure. After giving the French Republic formal notice to submit its observations, on 17 January 2001
the Commission sent a reasoned opinion to that Member State requesting it to adopt the measures necessary to comply with the
Directive within a period of two months from the date of its notification.
On 28 March 2001, the French Government informed the Commission that it intended to implement the provision in question as
soon as possible.
Since no measure implementing that provision was subsequently notified to it, the Commission decided to bring the present
action.
Pointing to the obligations incumbent on the Member States under the first paragraph of Article 10 EC and the third paragraph
of Article 249 EC, the Commission maintains that the French Republic was required to take all the necessary measures to comply
with the Directive within the prescribed period and to notify them to the Commission forthwith.
The French Government does not deny that it failed to implement the Directive within the prescribed period.  However, it states
that at the time of its implementation it encountered problems of a practical nature, relating to the number of inspectors
needed to ensure proper implementation of point 12 of Annex II to the Directive.  Measures are in the process of being adopted
to bring an end to the infringement.  New inspectors have thus already been recruited and further posts created for recruitment.
In that regard, it must be observed that it is settled case-law that the question whether a Member State has failed to fulfil
its obligations must be determined by reference to the situation prevailing in that Member State at the end of the period
laid down in the reasoned opinion and that the Court cannot take account of any subsequent changes (see,
inter alia
, Case C-394/00
Commission
v
Ireland
[2002] ECR I-581, paragraph 12).
It is common ground in this case that the French Republic failed to take the necessary measures to comply with the reasoned
opinion within the period allowed.
Furthermore, the Court has repeatedly held that a Member State may not rely on provisions, practices or circumstances in its
own legal order to justify failure to implement a directive within the prescribed period (see,
inter alia
, Case C-352/01
Commission
v
Spain
[2002] ECR I-10263, paragraph 8).
Accordingly, the Commission's application is well founded.
It must therefore be held that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply
with point 12 of Annex II to the Directive within the prescribed period, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations
under that directive.
Costs
Under Article 69(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the unsuccessful party is to be ordered to pay the costs if they have been
applied for in the successful party's pleadings.  Since the Commission has applied for costs and the French Republic has been
unsuccessful, the latter must be ordered to pay the costs.
On those grounds,
THE COURT (Second Chamber),
hereby:
1.
Declares that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with point 12 of
Annex II to Council Directive 91/439/EEC of 29 July 1991 on driving licences within the prescribed period, the French Republic
has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;
2.
Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.
Schintgen
Skouris
Colneric
Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 13 February 2003.
R. Grass
R. Schintgen
Registrar
President of the Second Chamber
–
Language of the case: French.