Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2015:417
Date: 2015-06-25
Language of the case: Latvian
Court formation: Fifth Chamber
Subject matter: Transport
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Latvia

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber), 25 June 2015 1. Transport — Road transport — Driving licences — Directive 2006/126 — Mutual recognition of driving licences — Conditions of issue or renewal — Normal residence of the applicant in the territory of the Member State concerned — Power of the Member State of issue to determine compliance with the normal residence condition (European Parliament and Council Directive 2006/126, Art. 12) 2. Transport — Road transport — Driving licences — Directive 2006/126 — Mutual recognition of driving licences — Conditions of issue or renewal — Normal residence of the applicant in the territory of the Member State concerned — National legislation requiring justification of a declared place of residence, to the exclusion of other means which could constitute evidence of normal residency — Not permissible (European Parliament and Council Directive 2006/126, Recital 8 and Arts 7(1)(e) and 3(b) and 12) 1. Observance of the normal residence condition, within the meaning of Article 12 of Directive 2006/126 on driving licences, is an essential element of the system established by that directive, the linchpin of which is the principle of mutual recognition of driving licences. Only the Member State issuing a driving licence is competent to verify compliance with the normal residence condition. That rule is equally valid for the Member State in which the holder of a driving licence applies to have it renewed. (see paras 36, 39) 2. Article 12 of Directive 2006/126 on driving licences must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State under which the only way in which a person who applies for the issue or renewal of a driving licence in that Member State can prove that he satisfies the condition of normal residence, within the meaning of that article, in the territory of that Member State, set out in Article 7(1)(e) and 7(3)(b) of that directive, is to establish that he has a declared place of residence in the territory of the Member State concerned. Although it is true that the conditions for proving compliance with the normal residence condition to the authorities responsible for issuing and renewing driving licences come within the powers of the Member States and that Directive 2006/126 lays down only, as is clear from recital 8 in the preamble thereto, the minimum conditions for the issue of a driving licence by the Member States, those conditions must not go beyond what is necessary to enable the Member State authorities responsible for issue and renewal to satisfy themselves that the person concerned meets that condition of normal residence in the light of the criteria set out in Article 12 of Directive 2006/126. In that regard, the absolute obligation to have a declared place of residence in the territory of a Member State, and therefore the refusal for an applicant for a driving licence to use other forms of evidence to establish that he fulfils those criteria, goes beyond what is necessary. Likewise, such legislation favours an element which does not reflect all of the criteria set out in Article 12 of Directive 2006/126, in that it excludes all other elements representing the situations referred to in that article. (see paras 43, 44, 46, 50, 51, operative part)