Case C-197/06: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 17 April 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank van koophandel, Hasselt (Belgium)) — Confederatie van Immobiliën-Beroepen België and Beroepsinstituut van Vastgoedmakelaars v Willem Van Leuken (Recognition of diplomas — Directive 89/48/EEC — Estate agent)
Date: 2008-04-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, freedom to provide services, frontier worker, interpretation of the law, real estate business, self-employed person

C 142/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

7.6.2008

8. Article 4(1) of Regulation No 2887/2000, read in conjunction
with Article 5a(3) of Council Directive 90/387/EEC of 28 June
1990 on the establishment of the internal market for telecommu-
nications services through the implementation of open network
provision, as amended by Directive 97/51/EC of
the European
Parliament and of the Council of 6 October 1997, requires that
the national courts interpret and apply the domestic rules of proce-
dure governing the bringing of appeals in such a way that a deci-
sion of the national regulatory authority concerning the authorisa-
tion of rates for unbundled access to the local loop may be chal-
lenged before the courts, not only by the undertaking to which such
a decision is addressed but also by beneficiaries within the meaning
of that regulation whose rights are potentially affected by it.

local

loop conducted by a national
that regulation,

9. Regulation No 2887/2000 must be interpreted as meaning that,
during the procedure supervising the pricing for unbundled access to
regulatory authority
the
it is for the notified
pursuant to Article 4 of
operator to provide the evidence that its rates respect the principle
that rates are to be set on the basis of cost-orientation. On the
other hand, it is for the Member States to allocate the burden of
proof between the national regulatory authority which made the
decision to authorise the rates of the notified operator and the bene-
ficiary challenging that decision. It is also for the Member States to
establish, in accordance with their rules of procedure and the Com-
munity principles of effectiveness and equivalence of judicial protec-
tion, the rules on the allocation of that burden of proof when a
decision of the national regulatory authority authorising the rates
of a notified operator for unbundled access to its local loop is chal-
lenged before the courts.

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Rechtbank van koophandel,
Hasselt — Interpretation of Articles 3 and 4 of Council Direc-
tive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 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 (OJ 1989 L 19, p. 16) — Obligation on an
estate agent established in one Member State and engaged in
agency activities in another Member State to satisfy the condi-
tions governing the exercise of
that profession which are
imposed by the legislation of that latter State in pursuance of
the directive — Requirement imposed even in the case where
there is a contract of collaboration between that estate agent
and an estate agent who is authorised by that latter State

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 3 and 4 of Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December
1988 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/EC
of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 May 2001,
preclude legislation of a Member State which makes the performance,
on its territory, of activities such as those at issue in the main proceed-
ings by a service provider established in another Member State, and in
a situation such as that of the defendant in the main proceedings,
subject to obtaining an authorisation the grant of which is conditional
upon success in an aptitude test in law.

(1) OJ C 96, 22.4.2006.

(1) OJ C 165, 15.7.2006.

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 17 April 2008
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank van
koophandel, Hasselt
(Belgium)) — Confederatie van
Immobiliën-Beroepen België and Beroepsinstituut van
Vastgoedmakelaars v Willem Van Leuken

(Case C-197/06) (1)

(Recognition of diplomas — Directive 89/48/EEC — Estate
agent)

(2008/C 142/04)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank van koophandel, Hasselt

Parties to the main proceedings

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 15 April 2008
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Labour Court
(Ireland)) — Impact v Minister for Agriculture and Food,
Minister for Arts, Sport and Tourism, Minister for Commu-
nications, Marine and Natural Resources, Minister for
Foreign Affairs, Minister for Justice, Equality and Law
Reform, Minister for Transport

(Case C-268/06) (1)

(Directive 1999/70/EC — Clauses 4 and 5 of the framework
agreement on fixed-term work — Fixed-term employment in
the public sector — Employment conditions — Pay and
pensions — Renewal of fixed-term contracts for a period of
up to eight years — Procedural autonomy — Direct effect)

(2008/C 142/05)

Language of the case: English

Applicants: Confederatie van Immobiliën-Beroepen van België
and Beroepsinstituut van Vastgoedmakelaars

Defendant: Willem Van Leuken

Referring court

Labour Court