Order of the Court (Third Chamber) 29 January 2004 in Case C-253/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Arrondissementsrechtbank te Rotterdam): S.A. Krüger v Directie van de rechtspersoonlijkheid bezittende Dienst Wegverkeer,
Date: 2004-04-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: driving licence, free movement of persons, interpretation of the law, mutual recognition principle

C 94/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

17.4.2004

that directive,

its obligations under

composed of: C. Gulmann, President of

any event, by failing to communicate to the Commission the
laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to
comply with Directive 2000/52/EC of 26 July 2000 amending
Directive 80/723/EEC on the transparency of financial relations
between Member States and public undertakings (OJ 2000 L
193, p. 75), the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to
(Fifth
fulfil
Chamber),
the
Chamber, S. von Bahr (Rapporteur) and R. Silva de Lapuerta,
Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has
given a judgment on 9 March 2004, in which it:
1. Declares that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
administrative
comply with
provisions necessary
Commission Directive 2000/52/EC of 26 July 2000
amending Directive 80/723/EEC on the transparency of
financial relations between Member States and public under-
takings, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil
its obligations under that directive;

the Court

to

2. Orders the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 213 of 6.09.2003.

(Language of the case: Dutch)

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published in
the European Court Reports)

In Case C-253/01: Reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
by the Arrondissementsrechtbank te Rotterdam (Netherlands)
for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that
court between S.A. Krüger and Directie van de rechtspersoon-
lijkheid bezittende Dienst Wegverkeer, on the interpretation of
Article 1(1) and (2) of Council Directive 91/439/EEC of 29 July
1991 on driving licences (OJ 1991 L 237, p. 1), as amended by
Council Directive 96/47/EC of 23 July 1996 (OJ 1996 L 235,
p. 1), and of the provisions of the EC Treaty on freedom of
movement for persons, the Court (Third Chamber), composed
of: A. Rosas, President of the Chamber, R. Schintgen (Rappor-
teur) and N. Colneric,
Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General;
R. Grass, Registrar, has made an order on 29 January 2004,
the operative part of which is as follows:

ORDER OF THE COURT

(Third Chamber)

29 January 2004

Article 1(1) and (2) of Council Directive 91/439/EEC of 29 July
1991 on driving licences, as amended by Council Directive
96/47/EC of 23 July 1996, must be interpreted as precluding
legislation of a Member State which requires, under certain
circumstances, holders of driving licences issued by another
Member State who are established in their territory to exchange
that licence for a national driving licence on the ground that a
driving licence issued by another Member State which does not
comply with the provisions on the period of validity which
apply in the host Member State cannot be registered in its
registry of driving licences.

in Case C-253/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Arrondissementsrechtbank te Rotterdam): S.A. Krüger
v Directie van de rechtspersoonlijkheid bezittende Dienst
Wegverkeer, (1)

(Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure — Freedom of
movement
for persons — Directive 91/439/EEC —
Driving licences — Mutual recognition — Compulsory
exchange)

(2004/C 94/19)

It is for the holder of a driving licence issued by a Member
State who takes up normal residence in another Member State
which has exercised its discretion under Article 1(3) of Direc-
tive 91/439 to prove that he fulfils the conditions set out in
the legislation of the host Member State on the renewal of
driving licences. However, once that has been proven, it is a
matter for the authorities of the host Member State to give due
effect thereto and authorise the holder to drive a vehicle under
his original driving licence.

(1) OJ C 289 of 13.10.2001.