Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2002:668
Date: 2002-11-14
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Right of establishment;Principles, objectives and tasks of the Treaties
Procedure: Action for failure to fulfil obligations - successful
Origin: Luxembourg

Summary of the Judgment 
1. Freedom to provide services — Restrictions — Patent agents — Requirement to elect 
domicile with an approved agent — Not permissible 
(Art. 49 EC) 
I - 2351 
SUMMARY — CASE C-478/01 
2. Community law — Principles — Legal certainty and protection of individuals — 
National legislation in a field governed by Community law — Need for unequivocal 
wording 
3. Member States — Obligations — Supervisory role of the Commission — Duty of the 
Member States — Cooperation in investigations into alleged infringements by Member 
States 
(Arts 10 EC and 226 EC) 
1. A Member State which maintains in 
force legislation making the supply of 
services by patent agents subject to a 
requirement to elect domicile with an 
approved agent has failed to fulfil its 
obligations under Article 49 EC. 
(see paras 19, 27, operative part) 
2. The principles of legal certainty and the 
protection of individuals require, in 
areas covered by Community law, that 
the Member States' legal rules should 
be worded unequivocally so as to give 
the persons concerned a clear and 
precise understanding of their rights 
and obligations and enable national 
courts to ensure that those rights and 
obligations are observed. 
(see para. 20) 
3. Article 10 EC makes it clear that the 
Member States are required to cooper­
ate in good faith with the enquiries of 
the C o m m i s s i o n p u r s u a n t to 
Article 226 EC, and to provide the 
Commission with all the information 
requested for that purpose. A Member 
State which fails to supply, during the 
pre-litigation procedure, the infor­
mation requested by the Commission, 
concerning the precise conditions for 
the application of provisions of 
national law raising questions of com­
patibility with Community law, has 
failed to fulfil that duty of cooperation. 
(see paras 24-25, 27, operative part) 
I - 2352