Case C-477/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Germany) lodged on 5 September 2013 — Hans Angerer v Eintragungsausschuss bei der Bayerischen Architektenkammer
Date: 2013-09-05
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: architecture, migrant worker, recognition of vocational training qualifications








C_2013344EN.01004601.xml










23.11.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 344/46





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht (Germany) lodged on 5 September 2013 — Hans Angerer v Eintragungsausschuss bei der Bayerischen Architektenkammer
(Case C-477/13)
2013/C 344/79
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesverwaltungsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Hans Angerer

Respondent: Eintragungsausschuss bei der Bayerischen Architektenkammer

Questions referred







1.








(a)


Are ‘specific and exceptional reasons’ within the meaning of Article 10 of the Directive (1) the circumstances defined in the categories that follow (numbered (a) to (g)), or must in addition to these circumstances ‘specific and exceptional reasons’ be given, for which the applicant does not satisfy the conditions laid down in Chapters II and III of Title III of the Directive?










(b)


In the latter case, of what sort must the ‘specific and exceptional reasons’ be? Must they be personal reasons — such as reasons relating to the individual’s curriculum vitae ‒ for which the migrant does not, by way of exception, satisfy the conditions for automatic recognition of his training under Chapter III of Title III of the Directive?














2.








(a)


Does the concept of architect within the meaning of Article 10(c) of the Directive require that the migrant in the Member State of origin, beyond carrying out the technical activities of construction planning, construction supervision and actual construction, has also or could also have, after his training, carried out creative, urban planning, economic and possibly historic building conservation activities, and if so to what extent?










(b)


Does the concept of architect within the meaning of Article 10(c) of the Directive require the migrant to have a university-level education, of which the principal component is architecture, meaning that it goes beyond technical matters of construction planning, construction supervision and actual construction, and also covers creative, urban planning, economic and possibly historic building conservation matters, and if so to what extent?










(c)








(i)


Do the answers to a) and b) depend on how the professional title of ‘architect’ is normally used in other Member States (Article 48(1) of the Directive);










(ii)


or is it sufficient to establish how the professional title of ‘architect’ is normally used in the Member State of origin and in the host Member State;










(iii)


or can the spectrum of activities normally associated with the professional title of ‘architect’ in the territory of European Union be derived from Article 46(1) paragraph 2 of the Directive?














(1)  Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications (OJ 2005 L 255, p. 22).