WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3705/98 by Markus FERBER German engineers' entitlement to draw up building documents in France
Date: 1998-12-07
Institutions: European Parliament, FERBER
Subjects: France, Germany, case-law (EU), engineer, freedom to provide services, provision of services, recognition of diplomas, right of establishment, town-planning profession, vocational training













EUR-Lex - 91998E3705 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E3705

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3705/98 by Markus FERBER German engineers' entitlement to draw up building documents in France  


Official Journal C 320 , 06/11/1999 P. 0068 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-3705/98by Markus Ferber (PPE) to the Commission(7 December 1998)Subject: German engineers' entitlement to draw up building documents in FranceIn France only architects holding a diploma as defined in Directive 85/384/EEC(1) are entitled to draw up building documents. Engineers, on the other hand, are not. Under the building regulations of Germany's Länder, however, consultant engineers as well as architects are entitled to draw up building documents.Articles 52 et seq. of the EC Treaty and the judgment of the European Court of Justice in the Vlassopoulou case, No C-340/89, require diplomas, certificates of qualification, other certificates and the professional experience of the provider of a service to be taken into account when an application to exercise a regular occupation is made in another EU country. Accordingly, engineers who have been performing architectural tasks and have drawn up the plans for buildings and industrial installations in Germany for more than ten years should also be entitled to draw up building documents in France.Can the Commission say what measures it will take to have German engineers' entitlement to draw up building documents recognised in France?Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission(28 January 1999)German building engineers do not possess a diploma as defined in Council Directive 85/384/EEC of 10 June 1985 on the mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications in architecture, including measures to facilitate the effective exercise of the right of establishment and freedom to provide services. In fact, they do not feature either on the list of diplomas recognised by virtue of established rights (Article 11(a) of Directive 85/384/EEC), or on the list drawn up on the basis of Article 7 of the same Directive(2).This Directive did not, however, provide for complete harmonisation of all architectural training. There may, therefore, be other perfectly lawful types of architectural training that do not comply with the Directive. These (and the qualifications concerned) should be taken into consideration under Article 52 of the EC Treaty, as interpreted by the Court of Justice in the Vlassopoulou judgment of 7 May 1991 (Case C-340/89). The Court stated in that judgment that the host Member State must take into consideration the migrant's diplomas, certificates and other evidence of qualifications and the professional experience he has gained, when it receives a request to take up or pursue a regulated profession from a migrant authorised to carry on that profession in his Member State of origin or in the Member State from which he comes. If the migrant's qualifications are equivalent to those required under national legislation for working in the field of architecture, he must be authorised to do so. Otherwise, he must be allowed to make good any deficiencies in his training. Finally, all administrative decisions must be reasoned decisions and may be the subject of court proceedings to determine whether they comply with Community law.The French authorities are therefore obliged to apply this ruling in the case of German building engineers. A complaint lodged by one of these engineers on this matter is being examined and monitored closely by the Commission. From the investigation of this complaint it has emerged that there may be problems of time scale and perhaps of substance.As well as indicating to the party concerned that it was in his interest to bring this matter before the French courts (which he has done), the Commission is continuing to investigate the complaint in order to determine what its possible consequences might be.(1) OJ L 223, 21.8.1985, p. 15.(2) OJ C 217, 17.7.1998.