# C_2004106EN.01004202.xml

| 30.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 106/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 106/42

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Simvoulio tis Epikratias (Council of State), Greece, by judgment of that court of 30 December 2003 in the case of Maria Aslanidou against the Minister for Health and Welfare

(Case C-142/04)

(2004/C 106/73)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by the Simvoulio tis Epikratias (Council of State), Greece, by judgment of 30 December 2003, which was received at the Court Registry on 17 March 2004, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Maria Aslanidou against the Minister for Health and Welfare

The Simvoulio tis Epikratias (Council of State), Greece, asks the Court of Justice to give a preliminary ruling on the following questions:

| 1. | Are the provisions of Articles 3, 4(1)(a) and (b) and (2) and 10(1) to (4) of Council Directive 92/51/EEC on a second general system for the recognition of professional education and training to supplement Directive 89/48/EEC (1) unconditional and sufficiently precise so that, during the time that elapsed between the expiry of the period prescribed for transposing the directive and its belated transposition into the national law of a particular Member State (the host Member State), they could be relied upon against an administrative body of that latter Member State, to which the national legislation in force at the time when the directive was transposed entrusted competence to grant permission to pursue a particular regulated profession, by an individual who, relying on the fact that he holds a diploma acquired in another Member State and falling within the scope of application of the above provisions of the directive asks to be allowed, in application of those provisions, to take up and pursue the profession in question in the host Member State? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Are the provisions of Articles 3, 4(1)(a) and (b) and (2) and 10(1) to (4) of Council Directive 92/51/EEC on a second general system for the recognition of professional education and training to supplement Directive 89/48/EEC (1) unconditional and sufficiently precise so that, during the time that elapsed between the expiry of the period prescribed for transposing the directive and its belated transposition into the national law of a particular Member State (the host Member State), they could be relied upon against an administrative body of that latter Member State, to which the national legislation in force at the time when the directive was transposed entrusted competence to grant permission to pursue a particular regulated profession, by an individual who, relying on the fact that he holds a diploma acquired in another Member State and falling within the scope of application of the above provisions of the directive asks to be allowed, in application of those provisions, to take up and pursue the profession in question in the host Member State?

1

| 2. | If it is considered that, during the time that elapsed between the expiry of the period prescribed for transposing Directive 92/51/EEC and its belated transposition into the national law of a particular Member State (the host Member State), the provisions of the directive were not capable of being relied upon by an individual against an administrative body of that Member State to which the national legislation in force before the directive was transposed entrusted competence to grant permission to pursue a particular profession either to graduates of the appropriate Technological Education and Training Establishment or to holders of a foreign diploma recognised as equivalent to a qualification from the Technological Education and Training Establishments of that State, following a generally-applicable, procedure described in the grounds of the reference, could that administrative body, taking into account the provisions of Articles 39 and 43 (formerly Articles 48 and 52) of the Treaty establishing the European Community, make acceptance of an application by an individual who, relying on a qualification acquired in another Member State, asked, during the above period of time, to be allowed to take up and pursue the above profession in the host Member State, depend on previous recognition, in accordance with the general procedure described above, of the equivalence of the qualification held to qualifications awarded by Technological Education and Training Establishments of that State, or should it have taken steps itself to undertake a comparative examination of the capacities attested to by the qualification submitted against the knowledge and qualifications required by national legislation and to reach a decision accordingly? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If it is considered that, during the time that elapsed between the expiry of the period prescribed for transposing Directive 92/51/EEC and its belated transposition into the national law of a particular Member State (the host Member State), the provisions of the directive were not capable of being relied upon by an individual against an administrative body of that Member State to which the national legislation in force before the directive was transposed entrusted competence to grant permission to pursue a particular profession either to graduates of the appropriate Technological Education and Training Establishment or to holders of a foreign diploma recognised as equivalent to a qualification from the Technological Education and Training Establishments of that State, following a generally-applicable, procedure described in the grounds of the reference, could that administrative body, taking into account the provisions of Articles 39 and 43 (formerly Articles 48 and 52) of the Treaty establishing the European Community, make acceptance of an application by an individual who, relying on a qualification acquired in another Member State, asked, during the above period of time, to be allowed to take up and pursue the above profession in the host Member State, depend on previous recognition, in accordance with the general procedure described above, of the equivalence of the qualification held to qualifications awarded by Technological Education and Training Establishments of that State, or should it have taken steps itself to undertake a comparative examination of the capacities attested to by the qualification submitted against the knowledge and qualifications required by national legislation and to reach a decision accordingly?

---

(1)  OJ 1992 L 209, p. 25.

1

---