# C_2006060EN.01000202.xml

| 11.3.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 60/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.3.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 60/2

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 19 January 2006

in Case C-330/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo:Colegio de Ingenieros de Caminos, Canales y Puertos v Administración del Estado (1)

1

(Freedom of movement for workers - Recognition of diplomas - Directive 89/48/EEC - Profession of engineer - Partial, restricted recognition of professional qualifications - Articles 39 EC and 43 EC)

(2006/C 60/04)

Language of the case: Spanish

In Case C-330/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the Tribunal Supremo (Spain), made by decision of 21 July 2003, received at the Court on 29 July 2003, in the proceedings Colegio de Ingenieros de Caminos, Canales y Puertos v Administración del Estado, concerning Giuliano Mauro Imo, the Court (First Chamber), composed of P. Jann, President of the Chamber, K. Schiemann, N. Colneric, E. Juhász and E. Levits (Rapporteur), Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, gave a judgment on 19 January 2006, in which it ruled as follows:

Colegio de Ingenieros de Caminos, Canales y Puertos

Administración del Estado

Giuliano Mauro Imo

| 1. | When the holder of a diploma awarded in one Member State applies for permission to take up a regulated profession in another Member State, the competent authorities of that Member State are not precluded by Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 on a general system for the recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years' duration from partly allowing that application, if the holder of the diploma so requests, by limiting the scope of the permission to those activities which that diploma allows to be taken up in the Member State in which it was obtained. |
| --- | --- |

1.

When the holder of a diploma awarded in one Member State applies for permission to take up a regulated profession in another Member State, the competent authorities of that Member State are not precluded by Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 on a general system for the recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years' duration from partly allowing that application, if the holder of the diploma so requests, by limiting the scope of the permission to those activities which that diploma allows to be taken up in the Member State in which it was obtained.

| 2. | Articles 39 EC and 43 EC do not preclude a Member State from not allowing partial taking-up of a profession, where shortcomings in the education or training of the party concerned in relation to that required in the host Member State may be effectively made up for through the application of the compensatory measures provided for in Article 4(1) of Directive 89/48. However, Articles 39 EC and 43 EC do preclude a Member State from not allowing that partial taking-up when the party concerned so requests and the differences between the fields of activity are so great that in reality a full programme of education and training is required, unless the refusal for that partial taking-up is justified by overriding reasons based on the general interest, suitable for securing the attainment of the objective which they pursue and not going beyond what is necessary in order to attain that objective. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Articles 39 EC and 43 EC do not preclude a Member State from not allowing partial taking-up of a profession, where shortcomings in the education or training of the party concerned in relation to that required in the host Member State may be effectively made up for through the application of the compensatory measures provided for in Article 4(1) of Directive 89/48. However, Articles 39 EC and 43 EC do preclude a Member State from not allowing that partial taking-up when the party concerned so requests and the differences between the fields of activity are so great that in reality a full programme of education and training is required, unless the refusal for that partial taking-up is justified by overriding reasons based on the general interest, suitable for securing the attainment of the objective which they pursue and not going beyond what is necessary in order to attain that objective.

---

(1)  OJ C 226 of 20.9.2003.

1

---