Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2000:223
Date: 2000-05-11
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Right of establishment;Freedom to provide services
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Italy

Summary of the Judgment 
1. Freedom of movement for persons — Freedom of establishment — Freedom to 
provide services — Doctors — Acquisition of specialist qualifications — Obligation 
to provide remuneration for periods of training only in the case of medical specialties 
common to all Member States or to two or more Member States and listed in Articles 5 
or 7 of Directive 75/362 — Condition — Compliance, by trainee medical specialists, 
with the conditions for training set out in the annex to Directive 75/363 
(Council Directives 75/362, Arts 5 and 7, 75/363, Arts 2(1)(c) and 3(2) and annex, 
points 1 and 2, and 82/76) 
I - 7881 
SUMMARY — CASE C-371/97 
2. Freedom of movement for persons — Freedom of establishment — Freedom to 
provide services — Doctors — Acquisition of specialist qualifications — Obligation 
to provide remuneration for periods of training — Whether directly effective — No 
direct effect — Obligations of national courts 
(Council Directives 75/362, 75/363, Arts 2(1)(c) and 3(2) and annex, points 1 and 2, 
and 82/76) 
3. Community law — Rights conferred on individuals — Breach by a Member State of 
the obligation to transpose a directive — Obligation to make good loss or damage 
caused to individuals — Extent of the reparation — Retroactive application in full of 
the measures implementing the directive — Sufficient reparation — Conditions 
1. The obligation to provide appropriate 
remuneration for periods of training in 
specialised medicine — laid down, so 
far as concerns full-time training, in 
Article 2(1)(c) of Directive 75/363 con­
cerning the coordination of provisions 
laid down by law, regulation or admin­
istrative action in respect of activities 
of doctors, as amended by Directive 
82/76, and in point 1 of the annex to 
that directive and, so far as concerns 
part-time training, in Article 3(2) of 
that directive and point 2 of the annex 
thereto — is binding only in respect of 
the medical specialties which are com­
mon to all the Member States or to two 
or more of them and are mentioned in 
Article 5 or Article 7 of Directive 
75/362 concerning the mutual recogni­
tion of diplomas, certificates and other 
evidence of formal qualifications in 
medicine, including measures to facil­
itate the effective exercise of the right 
of establishment and freedom to pro­
vide services, as amended by Directive 
82/76, and only if the conditions for 
full-time training set out in point 1 of 
the annex to Directive 75/363 or those 
for part-time training, set out in 
point 2 of that annex, are complied 
with by the trainee medical specialists. 
(see para. 45 and operative part) 
2. The obligation to provide appropriate 
remuneration for periods of training in 
specialised medicine — laid down, so 
far as concerns full-time training, in 
Article 2(1)(c) of Directive 75/363 con­
cerning the coordination of provisions 
laid down by law, regulation or admin­
istrative action in respect of activities 
of doctors, as amended by Directive 
82/76, and in point 1 of the annex to 
that directive and, so far as concerns 
part-time training, in Article 3(2) of 
that directive and point 2 of the annex 
thereto — is unconditional and suffi­
ciently precise in so far as it requires, 
for a medical specialist to be able to 
benefit from the system of mutual 
recognition established by Directive 
I - 7882 
GOZZA AND OTHERS 
75/362 concerning the mutual recogni­
tion of diplomas, certificates and other 
evidence of formal qualifications in 
medicine, including measures to facil­
itate the effective exercise of the right 
of establishment and freedom to pro­
vide services, as amended by Directive 
82/76, that where his training is full-
time or part-time in accordance with 
the requirements of the directives it 
must be remunerated. That obligation 
in itself does not, however, enable the 
national court to determine which 
body is liable to pay the appropriate 
remuneration or the level thereof. 
The national court is required, how­
ever, when it applies provisions of 
national law adopted either before or 
after a directive, to interpret them as 
far as possible in the light of the 
wording and the purpose of that direc­
tive. 
(see para. 45 and operative part) 
3. Retroactive application in full of the 
measures implementing a directive 
enables the harmful consequences of 
its belated transposition to be reme­
died, provided that the directive has 
been properly transposed. However, it 
is for the national court to ensure that 
reparation of the loss or damage sus­
tained by the beneficiaries is adequate. 
Retroactive and proper application in 
full of the measures implementing the 
directive will suffice for that purpose 
unless the beneficiaries establish the 
existence of complementary loss sus­
tained on account of the fact that they 
have been unable to benefit at the 
appropriate time from the financial 
advantages guaranteed by the directive 
with the result that such loss must also 
be made good. 
(see para. 39) 
I - 7883