# C_2009312EN.01001301.xml

| 19.12.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 312/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.12.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 312/13

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Ítélőtábla (Hungary) lodged on 7 September 2009 — Dr. Donat Cornelius Ebert v Budapesti Ügyvédi Kamara

(Case C-359/09)

2009/C 312/20

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Referring court

Fővárosi Ítélőtábla

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Dr. Donat Cornelius Ebert

Applicant:

Defendant: Budapesti Ügyvédi Kamara

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Can Council Directive 89/48/EEC (1) and Directive 98/5/EC (2) of the Parliament and of the Council be interpreted as meaning that the applicant, a German citizen licensed to practise law in Germany where he is a member of the Bar Association, but who has a permit to live and work in Hungary, has the right to use, in legal and administrative proceedings, the title ‘ügyvéd’ (lawyer), which is the official title in the host Member State (Hungary), in addition to the German title ‘Rechtsanwalt’ (lawyer) and the Hungarian title ‘európaiközösségi jogász’ (Community lawyer), in spite of the fact that he is not admitted to the Bar Association in Hungary and has not obtained any form of authorisation? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Can Council Directive 89/48/EEC (1) and Directive 98/5/EC (2) of the Parliament and of the Council be interpreted as meaning that the applicant, a German citizen licensed to practise law in Germany where he is a member of the Bar Association, but who has a permit to live and work in Hungary, has the right to use, in legal and administrative proceedings, the title ‘ügyvéd’ (lawyer), which is the official title in the host Member State (Hungary), in addition to the German title ‘Rechtsanwalt’ (lawyer) and the Hungarian title ‘európaiközösségi jogász’ (Community lawyer), in spite of the fact that he is not admitted to the Bar Association in Hungary and has not obtained any form of authorisation?

1

2

| 2. | Does Directive 98/5/EC supplement Directive 89/4[8]/EEC in the sense that Directive 98/5/EC on the practice of the profession of lawyer constitutes a special law on the legal profession, whereas Directive 89/4[8]/EEC merely regulates in a general manner the recognition of higher-education diplomas? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Does Directive 98/5/EC supplement Directive 89/4[8]/EEC in the sense that Directive 98/5/EC on the practice of the profession of lawyer constitutes a special law on the legal profession, whereas Directive 89/4[8]/EEC merely regulates in a general manner the recognition of higher-education diplomas?

---

(1)  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 (OJ 1989 L 19, p. 16).

1

(2)  Directive 98/5/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998 to facilitate practice of the profession of lawyer on a permanent basis in a Member State other than that in which the qualification was obtained (OJ 1998 L 77, p. 36).

2

---