Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2016:761
Date: 2016-10-12
Language of the case: Dutch
Court formation: Eighth Chamber
Subject matter: Provisions governing the Institutions;Transport
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Belgium

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber), 12 October 2016 Transport — Inland waterway transport — Directive 96/75 — Systems of chartering and pricing in inland waterway transport — Carrier — Definition — National legislation enabling a person not corresponding to the definition of carrier to conclude a contract of carriage as a carrier — Lawfulness (Council Directive 96/75, Arts 1(b) and 2) In the context of inland waterway transport activities, Article 1(b) of Directive 96/75 on the systems of chartering and pricing in national and international inland waterway transport in the Community, in so far as it defines a carrier as an owner or an operator of one or more inland waterway vessels, and Article 2 of that directive, in so far as it states that, in that field, contracts are to be freely concluded between the parties concerned, must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation that would enable a person who does not correspond to that definition to conclude a contract of carriage as a carrier. Indeed, Directive 96/75 in no way governs the intervention of chartering brokers or persons who, without themselves possessing the means to carry on inland waterway transport activities, would nonetheless personally undertake to provide such transport by making provision for the use of the services of a boatmaster. Accordingly, the description, in national law, of a party to such contracts as a chartering broker or a charterer has no connection with the interpretation of that directive. (see paras 34, 36, operative part)