Explanatory report on the convention on driving disqualifications (Text approved by the Council on 24 June 1999)
Date: 1999-06-24
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: administrative sanction, driving licence, offence, road safety

23.7.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 211/1

(Acts adopted under Title VI of the Treaty on European Union)

EXPLANATORY REPORT ON THE CONVENTION ON DRIVING DISQUALIFICATIONS

(1999/C 211/01)

(Text approved by the Council on 24 June 1999)

Introduction

frontier controls between most of

1. The growth of road traffic across the European Union,
encouraged by the single market and the removal of
the Member
internal
States, requires a determined collective effort to improve
is necessary to ensure that
road safety.
it
In particular,
decisions on driving disqualifications
are no longer
enforced only in the territory of a single Member State,
but also throughout the European Union.

2. It had long been recognised that there was disparity of
treatment between drivers who are disqualified in their
own country from driving and those who are disqualified
in a country other than the one in which they are normally
resident.
to drive
In the first case, removing the right
prevents the licence holder from driving in any country
where the licence previously allowed him to drive. In the
the disqualification applies only
second case, however,
within the country where it was imposed and only for as
long as the person is in that country; indeed, the licence, if
it has been taken by the authorities of that State, must be
returned to the driver when he leaves that country.

3. So whereas in the first case, the driver’s actions lead to his
being banned from driving in other countries, as well as in
his own country (State of residence) where the disquali-
fication was imposed,
in the second case it does not;
moreover, the driver can immediately drive legally in any
other country where the driving licence is accepted.

several Presidencies. Substantial progress was made during
the Luxembourg Presidency of 1997 and the Convention
was finalised during the 1998 United Kingdom Presidency.
In essence, the Convention provides a mechanism whereby
a disqualification in respect of the most serious road traffic
offences imposed on a driver in a Member State other than
his State of residence can be applied in all Member States.

Article 1

This Article defines the terms (cid:145)driving disqualification(cid:146), (cid:145)State of
(cid:145)State of residence(cid:146) and (cid:145)motor vehicle(cid:146) for the
the offence(cid:146),
purposes of the Convention, wherever the terms are used in it.

1.1. The definition of

a

it

is

in point

in others,

(cid:145)driving disqualification(cid:146)

(a)
laws and systems relating to
recognises the diversity of
disqualification which are in operation in the Member
States.
In some countries, a driving disqualification is
imposed as a primary measure, for example as part of a
criminal penalty;
secondary or
supplementary measure, perhaps imposed as a conse-
quence of a conviction; in yet others, it may be imposed
quite independently of a criminal conviction (cid:151) even by a
completely separate administrative authority purely as a
safety measure. For the purposes of the Convention, the
is intended to cover any
term (cid:145)driving disqualification(cid:146)
measure linked to the commission of a road traffic
offence (1) which results in the withdrawal or suspension
to drive (2). This
of
excludes the removal of a licence as a result of,
for
example, exclusively a medical condition or solely on
the basis of a so-called point-system. Moreover,
the
Convention applies only to driving disqualifications
which are no longer subject
to a right of appeal (cid:151)
either because the appeal process has been used and

the driving licence or

the right

4. This difference in treatment was not only contrary to the
interests of road safety in the European Union but also
highly inequitable. Thus,
in 1999, the subject was raised
by the Dutch Presidency in the Judicial Cooperation
Working Group with a view to finding a solution. But it
was not until 1995 that the French Presidency tabled the
first draft of a Convention, which was then discussed under

(1) The term (cid:145)offence(cid:146) also refers to the case of multiple offences
submitted at the same time resulting in a single driving disquali-
fication provided that at least one of the offences involved conduct
referred to in the Annex.

(2) As a matter of terminology rather than of substance, some national
provisions refer to the (cid:145)driving licence(cid:146) rather than to the (cid:145)right to
drive(cid:146).
In this context (cid:145)driving licence(cid:146) should be understood to
mean the national driving licence issued by the relevant authorities
of the Member States on the basis of their national legislation.

C 211/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

23.7.1999

exhausted or because the normal time limit for an appeal
has expired without an appeal being made.

It is noted that at the adoption of the Convention it was
understood that all decisions imposing disqualification
from driving taken in the State of offence,
including
those taken by administrative authorities are subject to
judicial control.

1.2. Point (b) defines the expression (cid:145)State of the offence(cid:146) as the
EU Member State where the road traffic offence which led
to the disqualification was committed.

1.3. Point (c) defines the expression (cid:145)State of residence(cid:146) as the
Member State where the driver is normally resident within
the meaning of Article 9 of Council Directive 91/439/EEC
of 29 July 1991 on driving licences (1). This states as
follows:

the purpose of

(cid:145)For
this Directive (cid:147)normal(cid:148) residence
means the place where a person usually lives, that is for
least 185 days in each calendar year, because of
at
ties which show close links between that
personal
person and the place where he is living.

However, the normal residence of a person whose occu-
pational ties are in a different place from his personal ties
and who consequently lives in turn in different places
shall be
situated in two or more Member States
regarded as being the place of his personal
ties,
provided that such person returns there regularly. This
last condition need not be met where the person is
living in a Member State in order to carry out a task of
a definite duration. Attendance at a university or school
shall not imply transfer of normal residence.(cid:146)

1.4. Point (d) defines (cid:145)motor vehicle(cid:146) by reference to Article
3(3) of Directive 91/439/EEC. The definition covers any
power driven vehicle that requires a driving licence of any
category or subcategory specified in Article 3 of the said
Directive,
licences referred to in
Article 10 of that Directive.

including categories of

Article 2

in accordance with the provisions of

2. Under Article 2, Member States accept an obligation to
cooperate
the
Convention so as to achieve the objective that drivers
who are disqualified in a Member State other than their
State of residence should not be able to escape the effects
of their disqualification simply by leaving the State of the
offence.

(1) OJ L 237, 24.8.1991, p. 1. Directive as last amended by Directive

97/26/EC (OJ L 150, 7.6.1997, p. 41).

Article 3

3.1. Article 3 establishes the mechanism which triggers the
enforcement process provided for
in the Convention,
namely a compulsory notification from the State of the
offence to the State of residence of the disqualification it
has imposed. Paragraph 1 provides that the notification
shall be given (cid:145)without delay(cid:146). It is important that the State
of residence should be able to take action as quickly as
possible, both in the interests of road safety and in order
to minimise delays in enforcing the disqualification. No
specific time limit is laid down within which the notifi-
cation is to be sent, but it is expected that Member States
will put in place mechanisms that fulfil the spirit of this
Article and ensure a speedy notification.

3.2. Paragraph 2 of Article 3 allows Member States to agree
with each other that notifications pursuant to paragraph 1
shall not be made in certain cases in which Article 6(2)(a)
would apply. Point (a) of Article 6(2) provides that the
State of
to the
residence may refuse to give effect
driving disqualification if the conduct for which a disquali-
fication has been imposed in the State of the offence does
not constitute an offence under the law of the State of
residence (cid:151) i.e. there is no dual criminalty. The purpose
of paragraph 2 of Article 3 is to avoid unnecessary notifi-
cations in circumstances where it is known that the State
of
to enforce a
disqualification because of the lack of dual criminality.

residence would always choose not

3.3. As a consequence of Article 8 of Directive 91/439/EEC,
the Member State to be notified pursuant to Article 3 of
the Convention may be a Member State other than that
which issued the driving licence concerned.
It was
therefore understood at the adoption of the Convention
that in such cases the Member State which issued the
licence would be informed of the situation by the State
of residence.

Article 4

4.1. The Convention sets out three possible ways in which
Member States when acting as a State of residence can
give effect to decisions imposing disqualification. These
are described in paragraph 1. Under paragraph 1
Member States are under the obligation to give effect to
the decision imposing disqualification from driving
in those
without delay. This is particularly important
cases where decisions
imposing disqualification from
driving take effect immediately or after any period for
appeal has expired in the State of the offence, in view
of the obligation of the State of residence to take into
account any part of a period of
the driving disquali-
fication which has already been served in that State.
This is essential to minimise any superfluous adminis-
trative efforts and will lead to an effective implementation
of the Convention.

23.7.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 211/3

In effect,

formality and without

4.2. The first possible way of enforcing disqualifications (point
(a) of paragraph 1) is by direct execution of the decision
imposing the disqualification.
the State of
residence recognises the decision taken in the State of
the offence and is able to give effect
to it with a
the need for the
minimum of
decision to be endorsed or confirmed in any way by a
residence. The only condition
court
in the State of
imposed on the State of
residence when directly
executing the decision of the State of the offence is that
it must take into account (cid:151) i.e. deduct (cid:151) any part of the
period of disqualification which has already been served in
the State of the offence. It should be able to calculate this
from the information provided to it by the State of the
offence in accordance with the fifth indent of Article 8(1).

4.3. The second possible method of enforcing disqualifications
is set out in point (b) of paragraph 1 (cid:151) indirect execution
of the decision imposing disqualification via a judicial or
administrative decision. This method of enforcement
allows the decisions of the State of the offence to be
endorsed or confirmed by a judicial or administrative
authority in the State of residence. Precisely how this
result is to be achieved is left to the Member State to
decide and is
likely to vary, according to different
domestic systems.

4.4. The third method of enforcement (point (c) of paragraph
1)
is by conversion of the decision imposing disquali-
fication into a judicial or administrative decision of its
own, thereby in effect replacing the decision of the State
of the offence by a new decision of the State of residence.

4.5. Enforcement under Article 4(1)(b) or (c) is subject to a
number of conditions which are laid down in paragraphs
2 and 3 respectively. These are designed, for the most
part, to give flexibility to cater for differences in laws in
the Member States. Apart from the requirement to take
into account any part of the disqualification period which
has already been served (cid:151) a requirement which is
common to all three methods of enforcement (cid:151) none
of the other conditions in paragraphs 2 and 3 need to
first method of
be
enforcement, since direct enforcement allows no latitude
for variation of either the period or the nature of a
disqualification.

laid down in respect of

the

4.6. In the case of enforcement under point (b) of paragraph 1
(indirect execution), three requirements are specified in
paragraph (2):

(a) Any part of

the period of disqualification already
served in the State of the offence must be taken into
account
(i.e. deducted from the original period
imposed). In case of a reduction of the duration of
the driving disqualification pursuant to point (b), this
point shall be applied on the basis of the reduced
period.

(b) The State of residence may reduce the length of the
disqualification imposed if that period is longer than
the maximum period which may be imposed under its
own law; but it may only reduce it to the maximum
period imposable under its law.

(c) The State of residence may not extend the period of
disqualification imposed by the State of the offence.
This follows a principle which is well-established in
conventions providing for transfer of sentences (cid:151)
the receiving country may reduce the
namely that
take action
sentence but may not
increase it or
which aggravates the penal position of
the person
concerned.

4.7.

case of

In the
enforcement under paragraph 1(c)
(conversion), five requirements are specified in paragraph
3:

(a) The State of residence shall be bound by the facts as
established in the decision imposing disqualification
reached in the State of the offence. This means that
the State of residence is not entitled to challenge the
basis of the disqualification; that remains a matter for
the State of the offence. Since, by virtue of Article 1(a),
only disqualifications which are no longer subject to a
right of appeal can be notified,
the driver should
already have had an opportunity to challenge the
decision in the State of the offence. If, however, he
sought in the State of residence to argue that he had
not had an opportunity to defend himself in the State
of the offence, the State of residence would need to
address Articles 6(1)(e) and 8(3).

(b) The State of residence, when converting the disquali-
fication, must take into account any part of the period
of the disqualification imposed by the State of the
offence which has already been served in the State
of the offence. In case of a reduction of the duration
of the driving disqualification pursuant to point (c),
this point
the
reduced period.

shall be applied on the basis of

(c) In converting,

the State of residence is entitled to
reduce the duration of the driving disqualification in
order to bring it into line with the sort of period
law, would have been
which, under
applied in the case in question, had that case been
dealt with wholly in the State of residence.

its national

(d) As in cases of enforcement under paragraph 2, the
residence, when converting the disquali-

State of
fication, may not extend its duration.

is

residence

also debarred, when
(e) The State of
from replacing the disqualification by a
converting,
fine or
restriction is
included to prevent the nature of the measure being
changed.

any other measure. This

C 211/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

23.7.1999

requires

the State of

residence, where
4.8. Paragraph (4)
necessary,
to determine the date from which it will
enforce the disqualification which has been notified to
it. This provision was considered to be necessary for
some Member States for the purpose of the enforcement
of disqualifications notified to them by Member States
which in accordance with their national
law may not
have started enforcing the disqualification at the time of
the notification for the following reasons, either that the
driver left the State of the offence very quickly before
substantive action could be taken, or that
the driving
licence was not available by the time he left. (In some
countries, a starting date for enforcement in the State of
the offence cannot be set until the authorities have taken
possession of the driving licence, so where no date has
been set by the State of the offence, it is necessary for the
State of residence to do so).

4.9. Paragraph 5 requires each Member State, when giving the
notification referred to in Article 15(2) of the Convention,
to indicate in a declaration which of the three methods of
enforcement set out in paragraph 1 it intends to apply in
its capacity as a State of residence.

This paragraph allows a declaration which has been made
to be replaced at any time by a new declaration.

It is also possible for a Member State to declare that it will
apply one of these procedures as a general rule, but that it
will apply another of these procedures in certain cases, to
be specified in its declaration by reference to objective
criteria. For example, a Member state could declare that
it will apply paragraph 1(a) (direct execution) in general,
but that it will apply paragraph 1(b) (indirect execution) in
cases where the duration of the driving disqualification
imposed by the State of
the
maximum term provided for acts of the same kind in
the Member State making the declaration.

the offence

exceeds

Article 5

5. The purpose of Article 5 is to make it clear that a State of
residence, having given effect to a disqualification imposed
on one of its own residents by a State of offence, is not
debarred from taking any additional road safety measures
that it considers appropriate and that are permitted under
its own legislation. Articles 4(2)(c) and 4(3)(d) exclude the
possibility of the State of residence extending the duration
of the particular disqualification which is notified to it and
which has been imposed in respect of a particular offence
or offences.
the imposition of
corrective road safety measures (including disqualification)
on drivers is not necessarily linked to conviction for an
it may already be
offence.
imposed when it
possible

In these Member States,
such measures
for

In some Member States,

to be

becomes known that a resident licence holder has offended
or committed other acts abroad in a way that reflects on the
safety of that person as a driver. Such a country’s ability to
take that action is not curtailed by the Convention.

Article 6

6.1. Article 6 sets out the only reasons which justify a refusal
by a State of residence to give effect to a notification sent
by a State of offence. Paragraph 1 of Article 6 sets out the
circumstances in which the State of residence must refuse
to give effect to a driving disqualification which is notified
to it. Paragraph 2 sets out circumstances where the State
of residence may refuse to do so.

6.2. The mandatory conditions for refusal mentioned in Article

6(1) are:

(a) Where the driving disqualification has already been
fully enforced in the State of
the offence. Clearly
there is nothing further for the State of residence to
do.

(b) Where the person who is the subject of a notification
has already had a disqualification imposed on him in
the State of residence for the same acts and that
disqualification has been or is being enforced.

(c) Where the offender would have benefited from a
general pardon or amnesty in the State of residence
if the acts he committed in the State of the offence had
been committed within the State of residence. This
kind of provision is common to a number of
Conventions dealing with the transfer of sentences.

(d) Where the period of limitation for the measure would

have expired under its own legislation.

(e) Where in a particular case, after the State of residence
has received information supplied under Article 8, that
State considers that the person concerned has not had
an adequate opportunity to defend himself. Article 8
contains the information which must be sent by the
State of the offence to the State of residence with a
notification under Article 3. This includes, where the
person concerned did not appear personally or was
not represented at the proceedings, evidence that the
person had been duly notified of the proceedings in
accordance with the law of the State of the offence.
Paragraph 3 of Article 8 allows the possibility for the
State of residence to ask the State of the offence to
the State of
provide supplementary information,
residence
information
received under paragraph 1 and 2 of Article 8 that

considers

receipt

if
of

on

23.7.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 211/5

it is insufficient to allow it to take a decision pursuant
to the Convention and in particular where there is
doubt that the person has had an adequate oppor-
tunity to defend himself. For example, the State of
residence may wish to be satisfied that
it was
possible for the person concerned to use his own
language in order to express himself clearly during
the proceedings leading to the driving disqualification.

Point (e) is not intended to permit general challenges
to the systems of law or judicial procedure of other
Member States.

6.3. The circumstances referred to in Article 6(2) where a State
of residence has discretion under the Convention to refuse
to give effect to a disqualification notified to it are:

Article 7

7. Article 7 deals with the practical arrangements for the
handling of notifications given under Article 3. Under
paragraph 1,
the competent authority in the State of
offence is to send the notification of a disqualification to
the central authority of the State of residence. Paragraph 2
requires each Member State, when giving the notification
provided for in Article 15(2) of the Convention, to specify
these authorities. It may designate one or more central auth-
orities as the recipients of notifications. It must also specify
the competent authorities who will be responsible for
submitting the notifications. It is entirely for each Member
State to decide for itself who these various authorities
should be. It does not, for example, follow that a central
authority for the purpose of this Convention will be same
authority as that for the purpose of other Conventions such
as the 1959 European Convention on Mutual Assistance in
Criminal Matters.

(a) Where there is no dual criminality (cid:151) i.e. where the
conduct for which the disqualification was imposed is
not an offence under the law of the State of residence.

8.1. Article 8 deals with the information which must be
the offence when sending a

provided by the State of
notification under Article 3.

Article 8

(b) Where the period of disqualification left unserved by
the time the State of residence has received the notifi-
cation and is in the position to enforce it is less than
one month. This means that the State of residence can
refuse to give effect to a disqualification notified to it if
it
the possible
commencement of enforcement the period of disquali-
fication left unserved will be less than one month. This
discretion is included to avoid disproportionate effort;
but it is open to a State of residence to enforce short
periods of disqualification if it so chooses.

is foreseeable that at

the time of

(c) Where the acts giving rise to the disqualification,
through offences in both States, are not offences for
which disqualification can be imposed under the law
of the State of residence.

the

all of

circumstances

take advantage of

6.4. Paragraph 3 allows a Member State, when giving the
notification referred to in Article 15(2), to declare that it
the discretion under
will always
paragraph 2 to refuse to enforce disqualifications
in
some or
set out under
paragraph 2. Where such a declaration has been made,
other Member States are then in a position where they do
not have
caught by the
declaration. A State which has made a declaration may
withdraw it at any time. The provision should be seen
in the context of the differences between the systems of
the Member States regarding the duration of disquali-
fications applied in relation to different offences and the
ways in which decisions imposing disqualifications are
executed.

to notify disqualifications

8.2. The details, set out in paragraph 1, are as follows:

(cid:151) details serving to locate the person disqualified from

driving.

The intention here is to provide information which
will enable the State of
residence to locate the
it can enforce the disqualification.
person, so that
The
information required will obviously include
(where available) the full name, date of birth, address
in the State of residence, any other regular address (for
example, if the driver is actually working for a period
in a country other than the State of residence). It will
also be useful if the driving licence number is given
(though this is unnecessary if the driving licence itself
is available and is being sent on to the State of
the final
residence by the State of offence under
indent of paragraph 1),

(cid:151) the original or a certified copy of
imposing a driving disqualification,

the decision

(cid:151) a brief statement of the circumstances and a reference
to the legal provisions in the State of the offence on
the basis of which the driving disqualification was
imposed, if these are not given in the decision.

It is likely that in all Member States, the (cid:145)decision(cid:146)
imposing a driving disqualification will
contain
details of the offence, the legal provisions relating to
it, and the circumstances of the particular offence but
if not, this information should also be provided with
the decision,

C 211/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

23.7.1999

(cid:151) an attestation that it is final.

Since by virtue of Article 1(a), only disqualifications
which are no longer subject to a right of appeal are to
be notified under Article 3, it is necessary for confir-
mation to be given to the State of residence that the
disqualification is indeed a final one and no longer
subject to appeal,

(cid:151) information regarding the enforcement of the driving
disqualification in the State of the offence, including
the length of the disqualification, and where known,
the dates on which the disqualification starts and
expires,

The State of the offence should in every case give the
fullest possible information to the State of residence
which will enable the latter to know the length of the
disqualification, when it started to be enforced and,
when, according to the original decision of the State
the disqualification is due to end
of
(subject
to any reduction in the period permitted
under Article 4(2)(b) or 4(3)(c)),

the offence,

(cid:151) the driving licence, if it has been seized.

Where the licence has been seized, and not returned to
it must be sent under Article 8 of the
the driver,
Convention to the State of
residence. This will
provide a good deal of the information required to
be sent under Article 8.

8.3. Paragraph 2 recognises that there will be occasions when
the driver was not present either personally or represented
at the proceedings where he was disqualified. All Member
States have domestic provisions
laying down rules
governing the notification of proceedings to defendants.
The effect of paragraph 2, in addition to the information
required under paragraph 1,
the
offence must provide evidence that the person has been
duly notified of the proceedings in accordance with its
law,
in any case where the person did not appear
personally or was not represented.

the State of

is that

8.4. Paragraph 3 recognises the possibility that, even when
information required under paragraphs 1 and 2 is
provided, it may still not be possible to reach a decision
on the notification. This holds true, in particular, in a case
where the competent authorities of the State of residence
have doubts concerning whether the person has had an
adequate opportunity to defend himself. In that situation,
supplementary
shall
the
information from the State of
the offence, which is
obliged to provide that without delay. It will be a matter
for
the authorities in the State of
residence whether such doubt exists. However, where it
does, the supplementary information will be needed in

the discretion of

residence

State

seek

of

order to enable the State of residence to consider whether,
under Article 6(1)(e), the person has had an adequate
opportunity to defend himself and whether it should
therefore refuse to give effect to the disqualification.

Article 9

9.1. Article 9 concerns the translation of notifications and
the
accompanying material and the
documents.
the
European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal
Matters of 1959.

certification of
It mirrors Articles 16 and 17 of

9.2. Paragraph 1 lays down the principle that translations of
material supplied by the State of the offence to the State
of residence shall not be required. This does not prevent
bilateral arrangements between Member States regarding
the translation of documents relating to the application of
the Convention.

Paragraph 2 gives Member States the right to derogate
from the principle by enabling them to make
a
declaration, when giving the notification referred to in
Article 15(2), specifying that the documents referred to
in paragraph 1 must be accompanied by a translation
into one of the official
languages of the institutions of
the European Communities.

9.3. Paragraph 3 provides that

in general,

the documents
referred to in paragraph 1 need not be certified. The
one exception is
the decision
imposing a driving disqualification, referred to in the
second indent of Article 8(1).

the certified copy of

Article 10

10. This Article provides for the State of the offence to receive
feedback from the State of residence about what it has
done with the notification sent
to it. The information
must include any decision taken on the notification, any
decision taken in respect of enforcement (for example any
the disqualification period in accordance
shortening of
In addition, where it refuses to give
with Article 4).
effect
the
grounds permitted in Article 6,
it must give reasons to
the State of the offence. This information will be directly
relevant to the exercise by the State of the offence of its
right under Article 11(1) to continue enforcing the original
period of disqualification in its own territory. The
information may also be relevant for the application of
the second sentence of Article 6(3).

to a driving disqualification under any of

Article 11

11.1. Paragraph 1 preserves the right of the State of offence, in
cases where,
the State of residence has
reduced the original duration of the disqualification, to
enforce, in the State of the offence, the full period of the

for example,

23.7.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 211/7

to state that

original disqualification. In practice, that means that the
driver, having served the reduced period of disquali-
fication, ordered by the State of residence, in accordance
with Article 4(2)(b) or (3)(c), would be able to drive in
the State of residence. In addition, but for Article 11(1),
he would also be able to drive elsewhere. However,
paragraph 1 gives the State of the offence the right to
maintain on its own territory the original period of
disqualification. Paragraph 2 allows any Member State,
when giving the notification referred to in Article
15(2),
it will not apply paragraph 1 of
Article 11 in its capacity of the State of the offence.
the driver should know
Clearly it
that
what his position is in relation to the State of
the
offence and whether or not, once he has completed
serving his disqualification in the State of residence, he
is still liable if he drives again in the State of the offence
during the original duration of
the disqualification.
Paragraph 4 therefore requires a State of offence which
proposes to apply paragraph 1 to notify the person of
this fact when it notifies him of its decision to disqualify
him. Paragraph 4 also requires the State of the offence to
confirm in the notification given under Article 3, that it
has given such notice to the driver.

is important

11.2. Paragraph 3 places a requirement on the State of the
residence to exercise their
offence and the State of
responsibilities under the Convention in such a way as
to ensure that the total period of disqualification served
in the two States does not exceed the period originally
set by the State of the offence. This re-enforces the need
specified in Article 8(1), fifth indent, for the State of the
offence to provide information about starting and expiry
dates, where known.

Article 12

12. This Article

requires

residence under

every Member State

to adopt
necessary measures to enable it to penalise the driving of
a motor vehicle in its territory by a driver disqualified
from driving by the State of
the
Convention. Every Member State has provision in its law
penalising driving whilst the person is disqualified by that
country. However, this Article requires States to be able to
penalise driving in its
is
disqualified by another country (i.e. the State of residence).
The Council noted at the adoption of the Convention that
the Danish delegation understands Article 12 as implying
that the Member State must have sanctions which it can
apply to a driver for driving a motor vehicle in its territory
after being disqualified in another Member State, but is not
obliged to use a specific national provision concerning
driving in the disqualification period.

territory whilst

the driver

Article 13

13. This Article

from
that
implementing the Convention will be borne in the
Member State in which they occur.

resulting

provides

costs

Article 14

14. This Article is concerned with the role of the Court of
Justice of the European Communities in relation to the
Convention.
It has to the widest extent possible been
drawn up on the basis of already existing provisions on
the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice in other instruments
adopted under Title VI of the Treaty on European Union.

Paragraph 1 confers jurisdiction on the Court of Justice of
the European Communities to rule on disputes between
Member States concerning the interpretation or application
of the Convention. That jurisdiction only arises, however,
where such a dispute cannot be settled by the Council
within six months of its being referred to the Council by
any Member State.

The Court of Justice can also rule on any dispute between
Member States and the Commission regarding the inter-
pretation or application of
In that
situation there is no requirement to seek settlement of
the dispute within the Council.

the Convention.

Paragraph 2 enables any Member State to make a
declaration to the effect that it accepts the jurisdiction of
the Court of Justice to give preliminary rulings on the
interpretation of the Convention. A Member State may
make such a declaration when ratifying or acceding to
the Convention, or at a later stage.

all

courts or

Paragraph 3 requires a Member State making a declaration
under paragraph 2 to specify whether preliminary rulings
can be sought only by its courts or tribunals against whose
decisions there is no judicial remedy (subparagraph (a)) or
by
jurisdiction
(subparagraph (b)). Moreover, the paragraph sets out the
conditions under which a preliminary ruling can be
requested. In that context the relevant court or tribunal
must require a ruling on a question concerning the inter-
pretation of the Convention to enable it to give judgment
in a case pending before it.

tribunals within its

Paragraph 4 provides for the application of the Statute of
the Court of Justice and its Rules of Procedure in respect of

C 211/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

23.7.1999

In
proceedings before the Court under
addition it permits any Member State, whether or not it
has made a declaration under paragraph 2,
to submit
statements of case or written observations to the Court
in cases which arise under paragraph 3.

this Article.

Article 15

15. Under this Article the entry into force of the Convention
will take place in accordance with the standard provisions
established for
the
European Union.

such matters by the Council of

The Convention will enter into force 90 days after notifi-
cation of deposit of the instrument of adoption by the last
of the fifteen States which were Members of the European
Union when the Council Act establishing the Convention
was adopted on 17 June 1998.

in the case of

As
judicial cooperation arrangements
concluded earlier between the Member States, paragraph
4 provides that any Member State, may, at the time of
adoption or at a later date, declare that as far as it is
concerned the Convention will apply in advance in its
relations with any other Member States which have
made the same declaration. These declarations take effect
90 days after the date of their deposit.

Member States may not, however, declare that the Court of
Justice has jurisdiction in respect of the Convention during
the period of advance application as this will require full
entry into force of the Convention following its adoption
by the fifteen Member States.

It should also be noted that paragraph 5 provides that the
Convention will only apply in relation to offences
into force or
the Convention enters
committed after
from the date on which,
in accordance with paragraph
4,
it becomes applicable between the Member States
concerned.

Article 16

16. This Article permits any State which becomes a member of
the European Union to accede to the Convention and
carries out the procedures for such accession. However, a
State which is not a member of the European Union may
not accede to the Convention.

to that State 90 days after the deposit of

If the Convention has already entered into force when the
new Member State accedes, it will come into force with
respect
its
instrument of accession. If the Convention is not in force
90 days after the deposit of
the new Member State’s
instrument, it will come into force for that State, as for
all other Member States, under the conditions set out in
Article 15(3). In that case the acceding State may make a
declaration of advance application.

The accession of a new Member State will not be a
condition for the entry into force of the Convention as
regards the other States which were members of
the
Union when the Council Act establishing the Convention
was adopted.

Article 17

17. The purpose of this Article is to make it clear that no

reservations are permitted to the Convention.

Article 18

18. This Article

the
application of the Convention for the United Kingdom.

establishes

scope of

territorial

the

Article 19

19. In accordance with this Article, the Secretary-General of

the Council is the dopositary of the Convention.

The Secretary-General is required to publish in the Official
the European Communities information on the
Journal of
progress of adoptions and accessions, declarations and
also any other notification concerning the Convention.

Monitoring

20. In view of the practical and technical issues which may
arise in implementation of this Convention, the Council
the Convention noted that
it
has at
would be
implementation and
for
application to be closely monitored by the Council’s subor-
dinate bodies.

the adoption of
appropriate

its