Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Freedom of movement for persons – Freedom of establishment – Workers – Recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years’ duration – Directive 89/48

(Council Directive 89/48, Art. 3)

2. Freedom of movement for persons – Freedom of establishment – Workers – Recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years’ duration – Directive 89/48

(Council Directive 89/48, Art. 3)

Summary

1. A Member State which refuses to recognise the professional qualifications of engineer obtained in another Member State on the basis of university education and training provided solely in the Member State concerned fails to fulfil its obligations under Directive 89/48 on a general system for the recognition of higher education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years’ duration, as amended by Directive 2001/19, and in particular Article 3 thereof.

Subject to the provisions of Article 4 of Directive 89/48, subparagraph (a) of the first paragraph of Article 3 of that directive entitles any applicant who holds a ‘diploma’, within the meaning of that directive, enabling him to pursue a regulated profession in one Member State to pursue the same profession in any other Member State. Moreover, a ‘diploma’, within the meaning of Article 1(a) of Directive 89/48, may be composed of a set of documents evidencing formal qualifications.

Accordingly, Article 8(1) of Directive 89/48 obliges the host Member State to accept, in any event, as proof that the conditions for recognition of a diploma are satisfied, the certificates and documents issued by the competent authorities in the other Member States. Consequently, the host Member State cannot examine the basis on which such documents have been issued, although they do have the possibility of carrying out a review as regards those of the conditions laid down in Article 1(a) of Directive 89/48 which, on the basis of the wording of those documents, do not appear to have been satisfied already.

Further, although the definition of the concept of ‘diploma’ set out in Article 1(a) of Directive 89/48 limits, to a certain extent, the applicability of that directive to qualifications acquired in non‑Member States, neither Article 1(a) nor any other provision of that directive contains any limitation as regards the Member State in which an applicant must have acquired his professional qualifications.

It follows expressly from the first paragraph of Article 1(a) of Directive 89/48 that it is sufficient that the education and training were received ‘mainly in the Community’. That expression covers both education and training received entirely in the Member State which awarded the formal qualification in question and that received partly or wholly in another Member State. Furthermore, no reason can justify such a limitation, since the main question is whether the applicant is or is not entitled to pursue a regulated profession in a Member State. According to the system put in place by that directive, a diploma is recognised not on the basis of the intrinsic value of the education and training to which it attests, but because it gives the right to take up a regulated profession in the Member State where it was awarded or recognised.

Furthermore, the general system of recognition laid down by Directive 89/48 is designed precisely to enable the nationals of a Member State entitled to pursue a regulated profession in one Member State to take up that profession in other Member States. In those circumstances, the fact that a national of a Member State who wishes to pursue a regulated profession chooses to take up that profession in his preferred Member State cannot of itself constitute an abuse of the general system of recognition laid down by Directive 89/48. The right of nationals of a Member State to choose the Member State in which they wish to acquire their professional qualifications is inherent in the exercise, in a single market, of the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the Treaty. The host Member State is required, pursuant to subparagraph (a) of the first paragraph of Article 3 of Directive 89/48, subject to any compensatory measures, to recognise not only engineering diplomas of another Member State if the education and training pursued in order to obtain those diplomas have taken place wholly or in part in that Member State, but also diplomas awarded by the competent authorities of that Member State following education and training provided entirely in the host Member State.

(see paras 54-55, 61-64, 71-73, 83, operative part)

2. A Member State which makes admission to internal exams for promotion in the civil service subject in the case of engineers with professional qualifications obtained in another Member State to academic recognition of those qualifications fails to fulfil its obligations under Directive 89/48 on a general system for the recognition of higher education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years’ duration, as amended by Directive 2001/19, and in particular Article 3 thereof.

Article 3 of Directive 89/48 requires that diplomas awarded in a given Member State must enable their holder not only to take up a regulated profession in another Member State but also to pursue that profession there under the same conditions as apply to holders of national diplomas. Consequently, the national authorities must ensure that holders of a professional qualification obtained in another Member State have the same promotion possibilities as holders of the equivalent national professional qualification.

Once a diploma awarded in another Member State has been recognised pursuant to Directive 89/48, where appropriate after compensatory measures have been imposed, it is considered to confer the same professional qualifications as the equivalent national diploma. In those circumstances, depriving the holder of a diploma awarded in another Member State of the benefit of the same promotion possibilities as holders of the equivalent national diploma, on the sole ground that that diploma was obtained after a shorter period of education and training would amount to placing holders of a diploma of another Member State at a disadvantage solely because they acquired equivalent qualifications within a shorter space of time.

Consequently, the homologation requirement is incompatible with Article 3 of Directive 89/48, at least in so far as that requirement constitutes a prior condition for admission to internal exams for promotion, even for candidates who rely solely on a diploma awarded in another Member State which is recognised pursuant to Directive 89/48.

(see paras 79-83, operative part)