Case C-253/01: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Arrondissementsrechtbank Rotterdam by judgment of that court of 27 June 2001 in the case of S. Klip-Krüger against Board of the Dienst Wegverkeer, a public agency having legal personality
Date: 2001-10-13
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU national, European driving licence, driving licence, free movement of persons, interpretation of the law

C 289/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

13.10.2001

2. Would it not be an alternative more compatible with
fundamental rights to restrict the obligation to disclose
company data to undertakings for which independent
auditors have found problems with specific data of
the undertaking and hence a special public need for
information?

3. Are the disclosure obligations in the First and Fourth
Directives compatible with the fundamental rights under
the European Charter of Fundamental Rights?

4. Did the data protection directive, telecommunications
directive and administrative assistance directive derogate
substantively from the disclosure directives?

registered, the holder commits an offence when driving a
motor vehicle in the Netherlands?

2. Does national legislation such as that described in the
first question and which has the consequences set out
therein constitute a restriction on the free movement of
persons and, if so, can that restriction be justified by the
consideration that it enables the data featured on the
document to be regularly renewed and the document to
be adjusted to technological improvements as regards the
requirements which the document should meet from the
point of view of security and prevention of fraud?

(1) OJ 1991, L 237, p. 1.

(1) OJ, English Special Edition 1968(I), p. 41.
(2) OJ 1978 L 222, p. 11.

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Arrondisse-
mentsrechtbank Rotterdam by judgment of that court of
27 June 2001 in the case of S. Klip-Krüger against Board
of the Dienst Wegverkeer, a public agency having legal
personality

(Case C-253/01)

(2001/C 289/18)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by judgment of the Arrondissements-
rechtbank Rotterdam (District Court, Rotterdam) of 27 June
2001, received at the Court Registry on 2 July 2001, for a
preliminary ruling in the case of S. Klip-Krüger v Board of the
Dienst Wegverkeer (road traffic authority), a public agency
having legal personality, on the following questions:

1. Must the Directive (1) — more particularly Article 1(1)
and (2) thereof — be interpreted as meaning that national
legislation adopted in implementation thereof is consist
with it where under that legislation an obligation exists
or arises for the holder of a driving licence issued by the
competent authority in the Federal Republic of Germany,
which is valid for the holder’s lifetime, to exchange that
licence within one year of moving his normal place of
residence to the Netherlands, because a driving licence
issued more than ten years previously cannot be registered
if the driving licence is not
in the Netherlands and,

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Simvoulio tis
Epikratias by judgment of that court of 12 June 2001 in
the case of Panagiotis Markopoulos and Others against
the Soma Orkoton
the Minister for Development,

Elegkton and Others

(Case C-255/01)

(2001/C 289/19)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by judgment of the Simvoulio tis
Epikratias (Council of State) of 12 June 2001, received at the
Court Registry on 3 July 2001, for a preliminary ruling in the
case of Panagiotis Markopoulos and Others against the Minister
for Development, the Soma Orkoton Elegkton (Institute of
Certified Auditors) and Others on the following questions:

a) May the national legislature, on the basis of Article 15 of
the Eighth Council Directive 84/253/EEC of 10 April
1984 (1), make use of the power provided for by that
article and provide for the possibility for various catego-
ries of persons to be approved to audit accounting
documents,
in derogation from the permanent rules,
that is to say without first sitting an examination of
professional competence, when the Member State in
question has already, before the adoption of the directive,
laid down that examination in national law? In any event,
may the national legislature make repeated use of the
power to adopt transitional provisions on the basis of the
abovementioned article of the directive, in particular after
the deadline of 1 January 1991 (Article 15 in conjunction
with Article 30(2) of the directive)?