# CE2004084EN.01088201.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/882 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/882

---

(2004/C 84 E/0976)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0807/04

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(15 March 2004)

Subject:   Invalidity of a civil aviation pilot's licence if use is made of it in another Member State or after revision of the rules governing Air Transport Pilot Licences (ATPL)

Subject:

| 1. | Is the Commission aware that in the 1990s an individual could evidently obtain a Dutch theoretical ATPL via the Opleiding Beroepsvliegers Schiphol flying school, having scored the highest marks for both theory and practice, but subsequently, because of a lack of openings in the Netherlands, looked for a job as a pilot in Germany and, since the Dutch licence is largely unrecognised there, was obliged to obtain a German ATPL at RWL in Mönchengladbach? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is the Commission aware that in the 1990s an individual could evidently obtain a Dutch theoretical ATPL via the Opleiding Beroepsvliegers Schiphol flying school, having scored the highest marks for both theory and practice, but subsequently, because of a lack of openings in the Netherlands, looked for a job as a pilot in Germany and, since the Dutch licence is largely unrecognised there, was obliged to obtain a German ATPL at RWL in Mönchengladbach?

| 2. | Is the Commission aware that individuals with a German licence could also evidently work as a pilot on all types of Boeing aircraft in Europe, the Middle East and Africa — first with Air Berlin (Berlin and Paderborn) for two years and then for Virgin Express in Belgium for seven years — but subsequently be grounded because, as a result of the introduction of new JAR licences, extensions were no longer issued every six months at the same time as medical certification? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is the Commission aware that individuals with a German licence could also evidently work as a pilot on all types of Boeing aircraft in Europe, the Middle East and Africa — first with Air Berlin (Berlin and Paderborn) for two years and then for Virgin Express in Belgium for seven years — but subsequently be grounded because, as a result of the introduction of new JAR licences, extensions were no longer issued every six months at the same time as medical certification?

| 3. | Does the Commission regard it as acceptable for extensions to be refused because only the Dutch licence includes a long-distance (Atlantic) flying component although, in order to obtain the German licence, the relevant training is repeated but the component is exempted from mandatory examination because the equivalent component in the Dutch examination is recognised? Is it normal that the German Federal Aviation Agency in Braunschweig should first respond only to JAR applications from within Germany and then issue non-national licence-holders, who have been forgotten, with certification which is valid only within Germany? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Does the Commission regard it as acceptable for extensions to be refused because only the Dutch licence includes a long-distance (Atlantic) flying component although, in order to obtain the German licence, the relevant training is repeated but the component is exempted from mandatory examination because the equivalent component in the Dutch examination is recognised? Is it normal that the German Federal Aviation Agency in Braunschweig should first respond only to JAR applications from within Germany and then issue non-national licence-holders, who have been forgotten, with certification which is valid only within Germany?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 2004)

(30 April 2004)

At present, the conditions for issuing licences to cockpit personnel are not harmonised at Community level. However, Council Directive 91/670/EEC of 16 December 1991 (1) establishes the principle of mutual acceptance, within the Community, of licences issued by Member States.

1

The Directive obliges every Member State to accept licences issued by other Member States on the basis of ‘equivalent requirements’. Where reasonable doubts remain as to the equivalence of the licence, the host State may consider that additional requirements and/or tests are necessary to enable the licence to be accepted.

The Directive also provides for the acceptance of licences issued in accordance with the requirements of Annex 1 to the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation, if the bearer satisfies the special validation requirements.

Member States are naturally also subject to the general provisions in the EC Treaty on the freedom of movement, the right of establishment and non-discrimination on grounds of nationality, and the general principles and case-law of the Court of Justice on mutual recognition.

Directive 91/670/EEC does not prevent the Member States from modifying the terms under which they issue licences, or from limiting the period of acceptance of a foreign licence, particularly when the original licence itself has a limited duration. The Directive also allows acceptance to be conditional upon the licence continuing to satisfy the conditions applicable in the host State, including the validity of a certificate of medical fitness.

In the absence of any precise details on the case at issue, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the answer in the first paragraph above.

---

(1)  OJ L 373, 31.12.1991.

1

---