Judgment;Summary — ECLI:EU:C:2021:1022
Date: 2021-12-16
Language of the case: Italian
Court formation: Sixth Chamber
Subject matter: Citizenship of the Union;Right of establishment;Internal market - Principles;Freedom to provide services;Free movement of workers;Anti-discrimination
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Italy

Summary C-274/20 — 1 
Case C-274/20 
Summary of the request for a preliminary ruling pursuant to Article 98(1) of 
the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice 
Date lodged: 
19 June 2020 
Referring court: 
Giudice di pace di Massa (Magistrates’ Court, Massa, Italy) 
Date of the decision to refer: 
16 June 2020 
Applicants: 
GN 
WX 
Defendant: 
Prefettura di Massa Carrara — Ufficio Territoriale del Governo di 
Massa Carrara 
  
Subject matter of the main proceedings 
Action seeking a declaration that the fine imposed on a citizen of the European 
Union, who has been resident in Italy for more than 60 days, for having driven a 
car registered in another European State is null and void. 
Subject matter and legal basis of the reference 
The prohibition in Italy of a person who has been resident in Italy for more than 
60 days driving a car registered in another European State (irrespective of who its 
owner is) could be discriminatory on grounds of nationality. Furthermore, the 
obligation to register in Italy cars that are registered in another European State in 
order to be able to drive in Italy, especially after such a short period of residence, 
could hinder and/or limit, indirectly but substantially, the ability of some 
European citizens to exercise their rights under Articles 18, 21 and 26, 
Article 45(1), and Articles 49 to 62 TFEU. 
EN 
SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING — CASE C-274/20 
 
2  
Questions referred 
1. Is the concept of the prohibition of ‘discrimination on grounds of 
nationality’ under Article 18 TFEU to be interpreted as meaning that Member 
States are prohibited from enacting any legislation that could, indirectly, covertly 
and/or materially, cause difficulties for nationals of other Member States? 
2. If the first question is answered in the affirmative, could Article 93(1-bis) of 
the Codice della Strada (Italian Highway Code), concerning the prohibition of 
driving with foreign number plates (registered in anybody’s name) after 60 days 
of residence in Italy, cause difficulties for nationals of other Member States (who 
own cars with foreign number plates) and consequently be discriminatory on 
grounds of nationality? 
3. Are the following concepts: 
a. ‘right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States’, 
as referred to in Article 21 TFEU; 
b. ‘internal market’ which ‘shall comprise an area without internal frontiers in 
which the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital is ensured in 
accordance with the provisions of the Treaties’, as referred to in Article 26 TFEU; 
c. ‘freedom of movement for workers shall be secured within the Union’, as 
referred to in Article 45 TFEU; 
d. ‘restrictions on the freedom of establishment of nationals of a Member State 
in the territory of another Member State shall be prohibited’, as referred to in 
Articles 49 to 55 TFEU; [and] 
e. ‘restrictions on freedom to provide services within the Union shall be 
prohibited in respect of nationals of Member States who are established in a 
Member State other than that of the person for whom the services are intended’, as 
referred to in Articles 56 to 62 TFEU 
to be interpreted as meaning that national provisions that could, indirectly, 
covertly and/or materially, limit or hinder the ability of European citizens to 
exercise the right of freedom of movement and residence within the territory of 
the Member States, the right of freedom of movement for workers within the 
Union, freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services, or in any 
way affect those rights, are also prohibited? 
4. If the third question is answered in the affirmative, could Article 93(1-bis) of 
the Italian Highway Code, concerning the prohibition of driving with foreign 
number plates (registered in anybody’s name) after 60 days of residence in Italy, 
limit, hinder or in any way affect the exercise of the right of freedom of movement 
and residence in the territory of the Member States, the right of freedom of 
PREFETTURA DI MASSA CARRARA 
 
3 
movement for workers within the Union, freedom of establishment and the 
freedom to provide services? 
Provisions of EU law relied on 
Articles 18, 21 and 26, Article 45(1), and Articles 49 to 62 TFEU. 
Provisions of national law relied on 
Codice della Strada (Italian Highway Code) (Decreto Legislativo 30 aprile 1992, 
n. 285 (Legislative Decree No 285 of 30 April 1992), as amended). In particular, 
Decreto-Legge 4 ottobre 2018, n. 113 (Decree-Law No 113 of 4 October 2018), 
converted, with amendments, by Legge 1° dicembre 2018, n. 132 (Law No 132 of 
1 December 2018), inserted, inter alia, paragraphs 1-bis, 1-ter and 7-bis into 
Article 93. 
Article 93(1-bis): 
‘Without prejudice to paragraph 1-ter, anyone who has established his or her 
residence in Italy for more than 60 days shall be prohibited from driving a vehicle 
registered in another country’. 
Article 93(1-ter): 
‘In the case of a vehicle which is leased or rented, without a driver, by an 
undertaking established in another Member State of the European Union or of the 
European Economic Area which has not established a secondary office or other 
place of business in Italy, and in the case of a vehicle lent free of charge for a 
given period to a person resident in Italy and bound by an employment or working 
relationship with an undertaking established in another Member State of the 
European Union or the European Economic Area which has not established a 
secondary office or other place of business in Italy, a document, signed by the 
holder and bearing a specific date, demonstrating the right of that person to be 
using the vehicle and the duration of that use, shall be kept inside the vehicle in 
accordance with the provisions of the Community Customs Code. In the absence 
of such a document, the use of the vehicle shall be deemed to be the responsibility 
of the driver’. 
Article 93(7-bis): 
‘An administrative fine of between EUR 712 and EUR 2 848 shall apply to 
infringements of the provisions of paragraph 1-bis. The investigating body shall 
forward the vehicle registration document to the vehicle registration office that is 
responsible for the territory concerned, issue an immediate ban on the driving of 
the vehicle, and order it to be transported to and stored in a location to which there 
is no public access’. 
SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING — CASE C-274/20 
 
4  
Succinct presentation of the facts and the main proceedings 
1 The applicants, GN and WX, are a married couple. GN is resident in Italy, while 
his wife WX lives in Slovakia, and is resident only in Slovakia. In 2019, while 
WX was in Italy, the couple were driving one day in WX’s car, registered in 
Slovakia, with GN at the wheel, when they were stopped by the Polizia stradale di 
Massa Carrara (Massa Carrara Traffic Police). GN was issued with a fine, as was 
his wife as the owner of the vehicle. The car was seized on the grounds that it 
contravened Article 93(1-bis) of the Italian Highway Code, since GN, who had 
been resident in Italy for more than 60 days, was driving a car registered in 
another country. By means of an application filed on 27 February 2019, the 
applicants, GN and WX, commenced proceedings against the Prefettura di Massa 
Carrara (Massa Carrara Prefecture) seeking a declaration that the fine imposed by 
the Massa Carrara Traffic Police on the basis of Article 93(1-bis) of the Italian 
Highway Code was null and void. Since the referring court has doubts as to the 
compatibility of that national legislation with EU law, it has stayed the 
proceedings and submitted a request for a preliminary ruling to the Court of 
Justice. 
The essential arguments of the parties to the main proceedings 
2 The applicants have asked the referring court to disapply Article 93(1-bis) of the 
Italian Highway Code since, in their opinion, it is clearly at odds with Articles 18, 
21, 26 and 45, and Articles 49 to 62 TFEU. They also maintain that such a rule, 
which is contrary to the logic of European integration, should not be permissible 
in the single European area. Member States should not adopt rules that could 
restrict the right of European citizens to drive in any Member State using a car 
registered in any other European State. Number plates should simply be European, 
in substance and not just form. This is the only way to ensure that the freedoms 
enshrined in EU law are fully respected. In addition, European citizens should be 
able to have their own car serviced in any other Member State. It should be 
possible to insure such cars with any European insurer; otherwise there is no free 
insurance market. The purpose of the rule, according to the Italian Government, is 
to limit the practice of ‘esterovestizione’ (that is, tax inversion) with regard to 
cars. However, in order to deal with tax inversion — that is, in order to establish 
the country of taxation of goods and income — all European countries have 
signed special ‘Conventions for the Avoidance of Double Taxation’ based on the 
OECD [(Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development)] model. In 
reality, therefore, the effect of the rule is to protect domestic insurance companies. 
Such covert protectionism is clearly at odds with the single market and with EU 
competition policy. 
Succinct presentation of the reasons for the reference 
3 The referring court raises doubts as to the compatibility of the abovementioned 
national legislation with EU law, and specifically with the provisions of the 
PREFETTURA DI MASSA CARRARA 
 
5 
abovementioned articles of the TFEU. Any restriction on the use of a car, 
especially on grounds of its nationality, inevitably restricts the rights of some 
European citizens within the European area. According to the provisions of the 
national rule at issue, persons who reside in Italy for more than 60 days are 
prohibited from using a car registered in another EU State, irrespective of who its 
owner is. For that reason, in order to avoid heavy fines, persons who wish to 
reside in Italy for more than 60 days are obliged to register their car, which has 
already been registered in another country, in Italy or, alternatively, to transport 
(export) the car to the country of origin, which entails a highly complicated 
procedure. 
4 Registering a car in Italy, in addition to the costs of registration and the complex 
bureaucratic process, requires the person concerned to have the car serviced again 
in Italy, to pay vehicle tax in Italy (even if the equivalent tax for that year has 
already been paid in another country) and, last but not least, to purchase a new 
insurance policy from an Italian insurer. 
5 Conversely, the export procedure involves sending the vehicle registration 
certificate and number plates to the competent Italian authority, which issues a 
provisional document and temporary number plates so that the vehicle can be 
transported to the country of origin. The new number plates must be insured 
again, while the original number plates and vehicle registration certificate can be 
de-registered with the competent authority in the country of origin after a lengthy 
waiting period (around 6 months). The provisional document and temporary 
number plates are not valid beyond Italy’s borders. 
6 For that reason, the rule at issue could indirectly or materially discriminate against 
European citizens on grounds of their nationality and restrict their right to freedom 
of movement and residence, freedom of movement for workers, and the right to 
freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services. 
Discrimination 
7 The national rule could be discriminatory, since Italians (whose cars are already 
registered in Italy, since they live there) will not have to incur extra costs and/or 
put up with added inconvenience in order to reside or continue to reside in Italy 
for more than 60 consecutive days. 
8 By contrast, other European citizens, in order to reside in Italy (for professional, 
work, study or tourism reasons) for more than 60 days, will have to incur 
significant costs and endure lengthy bureaucratic procedures. Moreover, Italians 
wishing to reside for more than 60 days in another European country have the 
right to use their own Italian-registered cars in that European country, since no 
other European State requires cars to be registered in the country after such a short 
time. This could lead to inequality. 
SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING — CASE C-274/20 
 
6  
9 Furthermore, if all European countries were to introduce such measures in a 
reciprocal manner, this would create an untenable situation and result in an 
impasse, particularly in light of the fact that a European citizen may be resident in 
more than one European State. 
Restriction of the right of freedom of movement and residence, freedom of 
movement for workers, freedom of establishment and freedom to provide 
services in the European area 
10 Conversely, the obligation to register their own car in Italy (especially after what 
is, objectively speaking, a very short period of residence in Italy — 60 days), 
could limit the ability of European citizens to exercise their freedoms under the 
TFEU, as referred to in the abovementioned articles (such as seasonal workers, for 
example). After 2 months, those workers would have to register their car in Italy 
and then register it again on returning to their country of origin. 
11 Not only is such a procedure uneconomical, it could actually prevent or at least 
restrict the right to freedom of movement for workers in the European area, 
particularly in Italy. The same argument also applies to any period of residence for 
study reasons or for holidays lasting more than 60 consecutive days, or to 
professionals or companies who need to perform a job or provide a service in Italy 
that could take longer than 60 days and who subsequently wish to return to their 
country of origin. 
12 The Italian rule at issue could effectively mean that such persons waive their 
rights or head for other countries that do not impose such restrictions. The 
interpretation of EU law on this point is relevant for the purposes of the decision, 
since, if Article 93(1-bis) of the Italian Highway Code is discriminatory under 
Article 18 TFEU and/or indirectly restricts the rights and freedoms of European 
citizens, as referred to in Articles 21, 26 and 45, Articles 49 to 55, and Articles 56 
to 62 TFEU, the contested fine should be declared null and void.