Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2003:535
Date: 2003-10-02
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Principles, objectives and tasks of the Treaties;Free movement of workers
Concepts: General
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Belgium

Summary of the Judgment 
Freedom of movement for persons — Workers — Restrictions — Prohibition on 
workers domiciled in national territory using rental vehicles leased from an undertaking 
established in another Member State and made available by the employer who is also 
established in the other Member State — Not permissible 
(Art. 39 EC) 
I - 11525 
SUMMARY — CASE C-232/01 
Article 39 EC precludes national rules of a 
Member State which provide that motor 
vehicles are permitted to be driven on its 
territory only if they have first been entered 
in the register of motor vehicles in the name 
of their owner, which if the applicant is a 
legal person, must have its registered office 
and a value added tax number in that 
Member State, and therefore prohibit a 
worker who is domiciled in that Member 
State from using on its territory a vehicle 
registered in another neighbouring Member 
State, belonging to a leasing company 
established in that second Member State, 
and made available to the worker by his 
employer who is also established in the 
second Member State. 
In such a case the worker cannot register 
the vehicle in the first Member State 
because he is not the owner; and the owner, 
the leasing company, cannot register it 
either because it is not established in that 
Member State and does not have a VAT 
number there as is required for registration 
of the vehicle. It follows that it is imposs­
ible for a worker domiciled in that Member 
State, who uses the vehicle for work and to 
go home at the weekend, to benefit from 
the provision of a vehicle belonging to a 
person established in another Member 
State. In the same way, such rules could 
discourage an employer based in one 
Member State from engaging a worker 
residing in another Member State because 
of the higher costs and administrative 
difficulties involved. 
Such a measure, which has the effect of 
preventing a worker from benefiting from 
certain advantages, in particular, the provi­
sion of a vehicle, may therefore deter him 
from leaving his country of origin in order 
to exercise his right to free movement. 
(see paras 18-21, 26 operative part) 
I -11526