Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2013:512
Date: 2013-07-11
Language of the case: Hungarian
Court formation: First Chamber
Subject matter: Approximation of laws;Freedom to provide services
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Hungary

Summary — Judgment of the Court (First Chamber), 11 July 2013 1. EU law — Interpretation — Methods — Literal, systematic and teleological interpretation 2. Approximation of laws — Insurance against civil liability in respect of motor vehicles — Obligations of the Member States — General obligation to insure vehicles normally based in their territory — Scope — Limits (Council Directives 72/166, Art. 3(1) and 4, and 84/5) 3. Approximation of laws — Insurance against civil liability in respect of motor vehicles — Directives 72/166 and 84/5 — Payment of compensation by the body which ensures that compensation is provided to victims of road accidents — Conditions — Limits — Insolvency of the insurer — Not included (Council Directives 72/166, Art. 3(1) and 84/5, Art. 1(4)) 1. See the text of the decision. (see para. 23) 2. See the text of the decision. (see paras 26-28) 3. Article 3(1) of Council Directive 72/166 on the approximation of the laws of Member States relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles, and to the enforcement of the obligation to insure against such liability, read in the light of Article 1(4) of Directive 84/5 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles, must be interpreted as not including, among the obligations which that provision imposes on Member States, that of establishing a body to ensure that compensation is provided to victims of road accidents in situations where, although the persons responsible for the damage had taken out insurance covering their civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles, the insurer has become insolvent. The payment of compensation by such a body was considered to be a measure of last resort, envisaged only for cases in which the vehicle that caused the injury or damage is uninsured or unidentified or has not satisfied the insurance requirements referred to in Article 3(1) of Directive 72/166. By contrast, the insolvency of an insurer is not one of those specific, clearly identified cases. (see paras 30, 32-33, 35, operative part)