# C_2006249EN.01000302.xml

| 14.10.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 249/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.10.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 249/3

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgericht Sigmaringen (Germany) lodged on 28 July 2006 — Arthur Wiedemann v Land Baden-Württemberg

(Case C-329/06)

(2006/C 249/07)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Verwaltungsgericht Sigmaringen

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Arthur Wiedemann

Applicant:

Defendant: Land Baden-Württemberg

Defendant:

Questions referred

| 1. | Are Articles 1(2) and 8(2) and (4) of Directive 91/439/EEC (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the withdrawal of a driving licence by administrative authorities in the State of residence on account of unfitness to drive does not preclude another Member State from granting a driving licence, and that in principle the State of residence must recognise such a driving licence? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Are Articles 1(2) and 8(2) and (4) of Directive 91/439/EEC (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the withdrawal of a driving licence by administrative authorities in the State of residence on account of unfitness to drive does not preclude another Member State from granting a driving licence, and that in principle the State of residence must recognise such a driving licence?

1

| 2. | Are Articles 1(2), 7(1a) in conjunction with Annex III, and 8(2) and (4) of Directive 91/439/EEC to be interpreted as meaning that there is no obligation on the State of residence to recognise a driving licence which, following the withdrawal of his driving licence by his State of residence, a person has obtained by means of a fraud practised upon the driving licence authorities of the issuing State and without proof that he has become fit to drive again, or who has obtained it by means of colluding with employees of the authorities of the issuing State? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Are Articles 1(2), 7(1a) in conjunction with Annex III, and 8(2) and (4) of Directive 91/439/EEC to be interpreted as meaning that there is no obligation on the State of residence to recognise a driving licence which, following the withdrawal of his driving licence by his State of residence, a person has obtained by means of a fraud practised upon the driving licence authorities of the issuing State and without proof that he has become fit to drive again, or who has obtained it by means of colluding with employees of the authorities of the issuing State?

| 3. | Are Articles 1(2) and 8(2) and (4) of Directive 91/439/EEC to be interpreted as meaning that where its administrative authorities have withdrawn a driving licence the State of residence may temporarily suspend recognition or prohibit the use of a driving licence issued by another Member State while the issuing State is considering whether to withdraw that driving licence, it having been obtained fraudulently? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Are Articles 1(2) and 8(2) and (4) of Directive 91/439/EEC to be interpreted as meaning that where its administrative authorities have withdrawn a driving licence the State of residence may temporarily suspend recognition or prohibit the use of a driving licence issued by another Member State while the issuing State is considering whether to withdraw that driving licence, it having been obtained fraudulently?

---

(1)  OJ L 237, p 1

1

---