REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the implementation in 2019-2020 of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport and of Directive 2002/15/EC on the organisation of the working time of persons performing mobile road transport activities (31st report from the Commission on the implementation of the social legislation relating to road transport), and on controls preformed under Council Directive 96/53/EC laying down for heavy-duty vehicles the maximum authorized dimensions and the maximum authorized weights
Date: 2023-04-04
Institutions: Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport, European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, application of EU law, arrangement of working time, drivers, driving period, rest period, road safety, road transport, social legislation, transport statistics

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 4.4.2023  COM(2023) 183 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the implementation in 2019-2020 of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport and of Directive 2002/15/EC on the organisation of the working time of persons performing mobile road transport activities (31st report from the Commission on the implementation of the social legislation relating to road transport), and on controls preformed under Council Directive 96/53/EC laying down for heavy-duty vehicles the maximum authorized dimensions and the maximum authorized weights      {SWD(2023) 74 final}  
 
 
Introduction 

This report gives an overview of the implementation of the EU social rules in road transport 
in the Member States for the period of 1 January 2019 until 31 December 2020. It highlights 
the key challenges in enforcement and application of the relevant legal provisions, which are 
set out in the following four legislative acts:   

1) Regulation (EC) No 561/20061 (also known as the Driving Time Regulation) establishing 
the minimum requirements on daily and weekly driving times, breaks and daily and weekly 
rest periods; 

2)  Directive  2002/15/EC2  (also  known  as  the  Road  Transport  Working  Time  Directive) 
laying  down  the  rules  on  the  organisation  of  the  working  time  of  mobile  workers.  It 
establishes the  requirements on  maximum weekly  working times, minimum breaks in work 
and night time work. It applies to drivers within the scope of the Driving Time Regulation;                                                                                                                                                                                                                

3) Directive 2006/22/EC3 (also known as the Enforcement Directive) establishing minimum 
levels  of  roadside  checks  and  controls  at  the  premises  of  transport  undertakings  to  verify 
compliance with the provisions of the Driving Time Regulation; 

4) Regulation (EU) No  165/20144 (also known  as the  Tachograph Regulation)  setting  the 
requirements  on  the  installation  and  use  of  tachographs  in  vehicles  within  the  scope  of  the 
Driving Time Regulation. 

The  analysis  of  the  implementation  of  Council  Directive  96/53/EC5  (also  known  as  the 
Weights  and  Dimensions  Directive)  laying  down  for  heavy-duty  vehicles  the  maximum 
authorized  dimensions  in  national  and  international  traffic  and  the  maximum  authorized 
weights  in  international  traffic,  is  also  included  in  the  present  report  in  accordance  with 
Article 10g of the Directive.   

1  Regulation  (EC)  No  561/2006  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  15  March  2006  on  the 
harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport and amending Council Regulations (EEC) 
No 3821/85 and (EC) No 2135/98 and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 (OJ L 102, 11.4.2006, 
p. 1). 
2 Directive 2002/15/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 on the organisation of 
the working time of persons performing mobile road transport activities (OJ L 80, 23.3.2002, p. 35). 
3  Directive  2006/22/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  15  March  2006  on  minimum 
conditions  for  the  implementation  of  Regulations  (EC)  No  561/2006  and  (EU)  No  164/2014  and  Directive 
2002/15/EC  as  regards  social  legislation  relating  to  road  transport  activities,  and  repealing  Council  Directive 
88/599/EEC (OJ L 102, 11.4.2006, p. 35). 
4  Regulation  (EU)  No  165/2014  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  4  February  2014  on 
tachographs in road transport, repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 on recording equipment in road 
transport  and  amending  Regulation  (EC)  No  561/2006  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  the 
harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport (OJ L 60, 28.2.2014, p. 1). 
5  Council  Directive  96/53/EC  of  25  July  1996  laying  down  for  certain  road  vehicles  circulating  within  the 
Community  the  maximum  authorized  dimensions  in  national  and  international  traffic  and  the  maximum 
authorized weights in international traffic (OJ L 235, 17.9.1996, p. 59). 

1 

 
 
                                                           
This report, based on Article 17 of the Driving Time Regulation and Article 13 of the Road 
Transport  Working  Time  Directive6  and  Article  10g  of  the  Weights  and  Dimensions 
Directive7 comprises quantitative and qualitative data on checks carried out by the Member 
States’ control authorities at the roadside and at the premises of undertakings, as well as on 
offences detected.  

The report is structured into three sections: Section I provides the analysis of the national data 
on checks and offences in the implementation of Directive 2006/22/EC and Regulation (EC) 
No  561/2006,  whereas  Section  II  gives  a  descriptive  outline  of  the  implementation  by  the 
Member States of Directive 2002/15/EC. Section III provides the analysis of the national data 
on  checks  and  offences  in  the  implementation  of  Council  Directive  96/53/EC.  Section  IV 
draws  the  main  conclusions  of  this  report.  A  Commission  Staff  Working  document 
complements  the  Commission  report  with  supplementary  information  on  penalties, 
cooperation  between  Member  States,  comments  from  enforcement  authorities,  and  more 
detailed  statistics  regarding  the  implementation  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  561/2006  and 
Directive 2002/15/EC. It does not complements the information regarding Council Directive 
96/53/EC.   

Data submission 

The  national  reports  on  the  implementation  of  the  provisions  of  Directive  2002/15/EC  and 
Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 must be submitted by 30 September of the year following the 
end of the two-year period concerned, by means of the standard reporting form established by 
the  Commission  Implementing  Decision  of  30  March  20178.  The  deadline  for  submitting 
reports covering years 2019-2020 expired on 30 September 2021. 

All  Member  States  have  submitted  their  national  data  on  the  implementation  of  Regulation 
(EC)  No  561/2006,  though  many  beyond  the  deadline.  The  Member  States  provided  the 
requested  breakdown  of  detailed  statistics  on  controls  of  compliance  carried  out  at  the 
roadside  and  at  the  premises.  However,  some  did  not  provide  data  sorted  by  the  requested 
categories,  e.g.  data  sorted  by  type  of  tachograph9  and  type  of  offences10.  Some  Member 
States explained reasons for not providing all required information11.  

6  Article  17  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  561/2006  requires  Member  States  to  communicate  every  two  years  the 
necessary information to enable the Commission to draw up a report on the application of that Regulation and 
the  developments  in  the  fields  in  question.  Article  13  of  Directive  2002/15/EC  provides  that  Member  States 
should report to the Commission on the implementation of the Directive, indicating the views of the two sides of 
industry. The reports on Directive 2002/15/EC and Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 can be presented in one single 
document as both legislative acts cover the same two-year reporting period and establish complementary rules 
for professional drivers. 
7  Article  10g  of  Council  Directive  96/53/EC  requires  Member  States  to  communicate  every  two  years  the 
necessary information concerning the number of checks carried out on heavy-duty vehicles and the number of 
overloaded vehicles or vehicle combinations detected. Article 10g of Council Directive 96/53/EC provides that 
this information may be part of the information submitted under Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006. 
8 C(2017) 1927 final.  
9 This is the case for Lithuania who informed that data was not available due to technical error.   
10 Latvia did not provide this categorisation for offences at premises.  
11  The  French  authorities  informed  that  the  data  from  the  Ministry  of  Labour,  representing  about  half  of  the 
national  inspection  obligations  in  enterprises,  could  not  be  extracted  from  the  information  system,  unlike  in 

2 

 
 
                                                           
Only 22 Member States have submitted the information on the implementation of Directive 
2002/15/EC,  although  sometimes  very  limited,  and  only  18  Member  States  provided 
statistical  data  on  controls  and  their  outcomes.  The  lack  of  quantitative  data  from  Member 
States makes an assessment difficult.  

Since the reporting obligations for implementation of social legislation and the Weights and 
Dimensions  Directive  refer  to  the  same  period,  the  Commission  considered  it  opportune  to 
combine  the  findings  of  the  controls  in  one  joint  report.  The  Weights  and  Dimensions 
Directive was amended by Directive (EU) 2015/71912 introducing a reporting obligation for 
Member  States  in  its  Article  10g  as  of  7  May  2017.  The  national  information  must  be 
submitted by 30 September of the year following the end of the two-year period concerned. 
The  deadline  for  submitting  reports  covering  years  2019-2020  expired  on  30  September 
2021. An excel template was provided to Member States to facilitate their reporting. 

Nineteen  Member  States13  have  submitted  their  national  information,  out  of  which  only 
Poland  sent  their  report  within  the  deadline.  All  Member  States  but  Poland  submitted  the 
information  disaggregated  by  year  and  Ireland  submitted  the  information  broken  down  by 
quarters of the year and by vehicles type (freight vs passengers). However, in some cases the 
information was incomplete. Malta informed that they were not able to provide the data for 
2019 due to a major fault in their weighing system. Germany indicated that the information 
they provided refers to the checks carried out by the Federal Office for Goods Transport, and 
that  they  did  not  have  uniform  statistics  for  checks  under  federal  responsibilities.  Belgium 
informed  of  a  residual  number  of  overloaded  vehicles/vehicle  combinations  detected  for 
which the number of checks carried out was unknown for both years 2019 and 2020. Croatia, 
the  Republic  of  Cyprus,  the  Czech  Republic,  France,  Hungary,  Lithuania,  Portugal  and 
Romania did not submit their national data for the current reporting 2019-2020. The lack of 
quantitative data for all Member States does not allow for a comprehensive assessment.  

I. Overview of enforcement activities for Directive 2006/22/EC and Regulation (EC) No 
561/2006  

1.  Checks 

Article  2  of  Directive  2006/22/EC  requires  Member  States  to  organise  a  system  of 
appropriate  and  regular  checks  at  the  roadside  and  at  the  premises  of  undertakings  that  are 
subject to the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006. This Article also establishes that 

previous years. Poland informed that no data was available on the number of police officers conducting roadside 
checks. 
12 Directive (EU) 2015/719 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2015 amending Council 
Directive  96/53/EC  laying  down  for  certain  road  vehicles  circulating  within  the  Community  the  maximum 
authorised dimensions in national and international traffic and the maximum authorised weights in international 
traffic (OJ L 115, 6.5.2015, p. 1). 
13  The  Member  States  that  submitted  their  national  data  were  Austria,  Belgium,  Bulgaria,  Denmark,  Estonia, 
Finland,  Germany,  Greece,  Italy,  Ireland,  Latvia,  Luxembourg,  Malta,  Netherlands,  Poland,  Slovak  Republic, 
Slovenia, Spain and Sweden. 

3 

 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                     
the  minimum  number  of  checks  shall  cover  at  least  3%  of  days  worked  by  drivers14  of 
vehicles falling within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006. 

The national data shows that the total number of working days15 checked in the EU decreased 
from  around  119.0  million16  in  2017-2018  to  108.9  million  working  days  checked  in  the 
current reporting period. This constitute a decrease by 8%. Looking at the national figures the 
decrease  of  working  days  checked  is  most  important  in  Malta  (-901%)17,  Ireland  (-69%), 
Bulgaria  (-59%)  and  Portugal  (-47%),  while  the  increase  of  working  days  checked  is  most 
visible in Greece (+70%) and Romania (+44%).  

As illustrated in Figure 1 below, the EU average of working days checked is 4.5%, which 
is  higher  than  required  under  the  Directive18,  but  presents  a  decreasing  trend  compared  to 
previous reporting periods (5.4% in 2017-2018 and 6.3% in 2015-2016).  

Figure 1: Percentage of working days checked per Member State 

18,0%

16,0%

14,0%

12,0%

10,0%

8,0%

6,0%

4,0%

2,0%

0,0%

Percentage of working days checked per Member State
%
9
,
5
1

%
0
,
8

%
2
,
6

%
1
,
3

%
7
,
3

%
9
,
3

%
7
,
3

%
3
,
3

%
2
,
3

%
1
,
7

%
9
,
6

%
7
,
4

%
0
,
9

%
4
,
2

%
3
,
2

%
0
,
3

%
4
,
3

%
9
,
2

%
5
,
0

%
2
,
0

%
3
,
6

%
5
,
1

%
5
,
3

%
3
,
4

%
0
,
5

%
5
,
4

%
5
% 4
,
2
,
3

AT BE BG HR CY CZ DK EE FI FR DE EL HU IE IT LV LT LU MT NL PL PT RO SK SI ES SE EU

% of working
 days checked

0,03

Most of the Member States  checked more working  days than  the minimum  required by  the 
Directive.  Nevertheless,  six  Member  States  have  not  met  the  threshold  of  3%,  namely 
Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, and the Netherlands. This is the same number 
of countries as in the previous reporting period where six Member States have not met the 3% 

14 This figure is based on the number of working days for two years and the number of registered vehicles in 
scope of the Regulation during that period for each Member State. 
15  The  term  ‘working  days’  is  used  interchangeably  with  the  term  ‘days  worked’  by  a  driver  in  the  relevant 
legislation: Regulation (EC) No 561/2006, Directive 2006/22/EC and Decision (EU) 2017/1013; 
16 The total 125.7 million working days checked in 2017-2018 comprised UK.  
17  Malta  informed  that  the  decrease  in  the  number  of  checks  was  due  to  Covid-19  circumstances  and  also  a 
sudden departure of the two employees who at that time were solely responsible for the tachograph inspections. 
The  Maltese  authorities  recognised  the  need  to  address  this  issue  immediately  and  to  proceed  to  train  eight 
personnel to ensure that such situation does not occur again in the future.  
18  Especially  in  Austria,  Bulgaria,  France,  Germany,  Latvia,  Portugal  and  Romania  who  accounted  for  1/3  of 
working days checked. 

4 

 
 
 
                                                           
threshold  in  2017-2018  and  three  Member  States  in  2015-2016.  Among  the  six  Member 
States19 which had not met the threshold of 3% in 2017-2018, only Greece, Ireland and the 
Netherlands  remained  in  this  ‘underperformig’  group,  joined  by  the  three  other  Member 
States,  which  performed  well  in  the  previous  reporting  period.  Greece  increased  its 
enforcement efforts significantly (improvement from 0.1% in 2015-2016, 0.7% in 2017-2018 
to 2.4% in the current period), but it remains still below the threshold.  

Article 2 of Directive 2006/22/EC also sets out the ratio of the working days to be checked at 
the  roadside  and  at  the  premises,  namely  at  least  30%  and  at  least  50%  respectively.  The 
calculation  of  this  proportion  is  based  on  the  number  of  checks  actually  performed  by 
enforcement authorities and not on the minimum number of working days to be checked.  

On average, 60% of the working days checked have been done at the roadside whereas 
40% were checked through inspections at the premises. This is a decrease in checks at the 
roadside compared to the last period (73% in 2017-2018) and a positive increase in checks at 
the premises compared to the last period (27% in 2017-2018). This change may be explained 
partly  by  Covid-19  circumstances.  In  most  Member  States  a  large  share  of  checks  were 
performed  at  the  roadside.  Greece  and  Ireland  reported  a  low  number  of  checks  at  the 
roadside.  Malta  reported  no  checks  at  the  premises.  Only  six  Member  States  have  the 
required  balanced  share  between  premises  and  roadside  checks20,  against  eight  Member 
States in 2017-2018.   

For details on the national share of roadside and premises checks see Figure 2.  

Figure 2: Share of roadside and premises checks based on working days checked per Member State 

Share of roadside and premises checks based on working days checked per Member State

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

%
9
1

%
8
1

%
1
8

%
2
8

%
3
5

%
7
4

%
4
3

%
6
3

%
6
3

%
4
3

%
7
6

%
3
6

%
6
6

%
4
6

%
4
6

%
6
6

%
3
3

%
7
3

%
0

%
4
1

%
0
0
1

%
6
8

%
5
3

%
5
6

%
9
5

%
3
6

%
1
4

%
7
3

%
6
1

%
8
1

%
7
1

%
5
2

%
8
8

%
2
8

%
4
8

%
2
8

%
3
8

%
5
7

%
2
1

%
8
1

%
7
2

%
7
4

%
9
4

%
7
% 4
3
6

%
0
3

%
6
3

%
0
4

%
3
7

%
3
5

%
1
5

%
3
% 5
7
3

%
0
7

%
4
6

%
0
6

AT BE BG HR CY CZ DK EE FI FR DE EL HU IE IT LV LT LU MT NL PL PT RO SK SI ES SE EU

% at roadside

% at premises

19 Denmark, Finland, Greece, Ireland, Lithuania and the Netherlands.  
20 Bulgaria, Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Slovakia.  

5 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
1.1 Roadside checks 

In total, 4,112,71721 vehicles and 4,323,245 drivers were checked at the roadside throughout 
the EU compared to 4,982,439 vehicles and 5,395,009 drivers checked in 2017-201822. The 
difference between the number of vehicles and drivers checked may be explained by multi-
manning  driving,  i.e.  where  there  are  at  least  two  drivers  in  the  vehicle  to  do  the  driving. 
Differences  between  the  number  of  drivers  and  vehicles  are  mainly  present  in  reports  from 
Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Poland, Romania and Slovenia.  

Compared to the report for 2017-2018, the reported number of vehicles checked decreased by 
869,722 vehicles. This is mainly due to the fact that the number of vehicles checked by UK 
(156,496  vehicles  in  2017-2018)  is  not  comprised  in  the  current  report  and  to  significant 
decreases  in  the  numbers  reported  Malta  (-73%),  which  were  not  compensated  by  the 
increases reported by other Member States23. 

The number of drivers checked decreased by 1,071,764 drivers compared to 2017-2018. This 
is also due to the fact that the number of drivers checked by UK (156,496 drivers in 2017-
2018) is not comprised in the current report and accumulative effects of decreases in several 
other Member States.  

Based  on  the  country  of  registration  of  the  vehicle,  63%  of  the  checked  vehicles  were 
national vehicles, 31% were from other EU Member States and 6% were vehicles registered 
in non-EU countries24. Overall, most of the vehicles checked at the roadside (about 91% of 
the total) were carriers of goods, whereas only less than 10% were carriers of passengers.  

In 2019-2020, 74% of the vehicles checked at the roadside were equipped with a digital 
tachograph, against 75% in the previous reporting period. Hence, there are no  grounds for 
raising the threshold of checks from 3% to 4%, as this should be done when 90% of checked 
vehicles  are  equipped  with  digital  tachographs  according  to  Article  2(3)  of  Directive 
2006/22/EC. 

1.2 Checks at the premises 

In 2019-2020 period, 58,30025 transport undertakings were checked, which is a 44% decrease 
compared to 104,10426 transport undertakings checked in 2017-2018. Controllers at premises 
checked  around  34.3  million  working  days,  which  represents  an  increase  of  about  2% 
compared to 33.7 million in the previous report, even considering no checks at the premises 
in Malta and no data from the UK. Overall, Member States’ control authorities checked at the 
premises the records of 499,943 drivers, which is 14% fewer compared to 641,033 drivers in 
2017-2018. 

21 Lithuania did not report data.  
22 The figure for 2017-2018 includes data from the UK (i.e.17,461 undertakings). Without data from the UK, the 
decrease is almost 33%. 
23 For example +81% in Denmark and 64% in Luxembourg.   
24 Lithuania did not provide this data. Cyprus reported that only national vehicles were checked.   
25 Malta did not provide this data.  
26 86.643 undertakings checked in 2017-2018 without the UK.  

6 

 
 
                                                           
2.  Offences 

All 27 Member States provided data on offences detected, but not all27 provided details on the 
types of infringements. The total number of offences reported was around 2.25 million, 
which is a decrease compared to the last report (3.41 million28). This may be explained by 
the  fact  that  fewer  working  days  were  checked.  The  share  of  roadside  offences  detected 
remained stable at the level of 60% of total offences detected (58 % in the last report). 

The share of types of infringements in the overall number of detected infringements remained 
similar as in the previous reporting period, with some changes. Figure 3 below illustrates the 
EU  average  share  of  infringements  by  the  type  of  provision  infringed,  detected  at  both 
roadside  and  premises  in  2019-2020.  The  number  of  offences  regarding  breaks  increased 
from 17% to 19%, whereas offences of the driving time records decreased from 27% to 26%. 
Offences  for  rest  periods  constitute  23%  of  total  offences  like  in  the  last  report,  recording 
equipment29 represent 9% of total offences (12% in the last report) and the lack/availability of 
records  for  other  work  constitute  8%  (6%  in  the  last  report)  of  all  detected  infringements. 
These developments are presented in Figure 4 below. 

The average offence rate, which is calculated based on 100 working days checked at premises 
and roadside checks, decreased from 2.7 in 2017-2018 to 2.1 in the current reporting period. 
The detection  rate  at  premises  remains higher than the detection  rate at  the roadside, 
which  confirms  that  checks  at  the  premises  are  more  efficient  than  ad  hoc  roadside 
controls.  However,  the  detection  rate  at  premises  decreased  compared  to  the  last  reporting 
period.    

Figure 3: Categories of infringements at roadside and premises 2019-2020 

Categories of infringements at roadside and premises 2019-2020

9%

8%

19%

Breaks

Rest periods

26%

23%

Driving time

15%

Driving time records

Recording equipment

Lack of records

27 Latvia did not provide types of offences at premises checks. 
28 Or 3.29 million without the UK. 
29 Offences regarding recording equipment relate to the incorrect functioning and misuse or manipulation of the 
recording equipment.  

7 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                           
Figure 4: Categories of infringements at roadside and premises over the last 10 years 

l

a
t
o
t

f
o
e
r
a
h
S

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

2009-2010

2011-2012

2013-2014

2015-2016

2017-2018

2019-2020

Breaks

Rest periods

Driving time

Driving time records

Recording equipment

Lack/availability of records for
other work

29%

23%

18%

15%

5%

8%

26%

24%

19%

17%

8%

6%

23%

25%

16%

17%

10%

8%

21%

24%

13%

24%

11%

7%

17%

23%

14%

27%

12%

6%

19%

23%

15%

26%

9%

8%

2.1 Offences detected at the roadside 

Around 1.36 million offences were detected at the roadside in 2019-2020, which is about 
30%  less  compared  to  around  1.94  million  offences  in  2017-201830.  The  EU  average  of 
offences detected at the roadside decreased from 2.11 to 1.82 per 100 working days checked. 
On  average,  53%  of  offences  were  found  to  be  committed  by  domestic  drivers,  while  the 
share of domestic vehicles among all vehicles stopped for controls was 63%. 

2.2 Offences detected at the premises 

The  number  of  offences  detected  at  the  premises  was  about  890,000,  which  is  a 
significant  decrease  compared  to  the  last  report  (1.46  million).  The  average  offence 
detection rate per 100 working days checked decreased from 4.35 to 2.59, which represents a 
decrease of 40% compared to 2017-2018. The average offence rate detected at premises per 
undertaking increased slightly from 14 offences per undertaking in 2017-2018 to more than 
15 offences per undertaking.  

2.3 Number of enforcement officers and equipment to analyse tachographs 

In  the  current  reporting  period,  54,679  control  officers  (against  61,558  in  2017-2018)  were 
involved  in  checks  throughout  the  EU.  This  is  a  continuous  decreasing  trend,  even 
considering that the figures from the UK from the previous reporting period (i.e. 588 control 
officers) are not included.    

30 Or about 1.84 million offences without the UK. 

8 

 
 
 
                                                           
 
 
20,058 control officers were trained to analyse the digital tachograph records (against 21,786 
in 2017-2018). The units of equipment provided to control officers to analyse the tachograph 
records increased from 9,677 in 2017-2018 to 13,067 in 2019-2020.  

3.  Interpretation  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  561/2006  by  the  Court  of  Justice  of  the 

European Union 

The Court of Justice of the European Union provided  interpretation of Regulation (EC)  No 
561/2006 by means of the rulings in Case C-834/1831 of 10 April 2019. The Court ruled that 
the  term  'weekly  rest  period',  within  the  meaning  of  Article  8  of  Regulation  (EC)  No 
561/2006, does not necessarily have to end during the 'week', as defined in Article 4(i) of that 
Regulation.  

4.  Cooperation between Member States 

According to Article 5 of Directive 2006/22/EC, Member States are obliged to undertake no 
less than six  concerted roadside checks per  year  with at least one other Member State. The 
cooperation  between  Member  States  based  on  concerted  checks,  joint  training  initiatives  or 
exchanges of experience and information, plays a crucial role in steeping up enforcement in 
order  to  achieve  the  objectives  of  the  social  legislation  in  the  road  transport  sector,  i.e. 
improved working conditions, fair competition and improved road safety. Mobility Package 
I32, which was adopted in July 2020 and started applying (partially) on 20 August 2020, aims 
to promote and reinforce the cooperation and mutual assistance between Member States and 
to  ensure  more  effective  and  consistent  enforcement  of  the  rules  in  force.  In  addition,  the 
European  Labour  Authority  (ELA),  which  was  established  in  201933  with  an  overarching 
objective to ensure fair labour mobility in the internal market, started its information, training 
and  enforcement  support  activities  in  the  road  transport  area.  One  of  ELA’s  main  tasks 
consists  in  supporting  cooperation  between  Member  States  in  the  cross-border  enforcement 
and facilitating joint inspections including in the area of EU social rules in the road transport 
sector.  

Due to the Covid-19 crisis, many foreseen joint enforcement actions could not take place in 
2020. However, even regarding the year of 2019, not all Member States provided information 
on  the  exact  number  of  concerted  checks  or  did  not  report  at  all  on  whether  they  had 
undertaken concerted checks. Out of the 14 Member States that did provide information on 
checks34, 12 Member States35 met the required number of concerted checks in the reporting 
period.  

31 https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/P_126035/en/ 
32 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L:2020:249:FULL&from=FR 
33  Regulation  (EU)  2019/1149 of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  20  June  2019  establishing  a 
European Labour Authority, amending Regulations (EC) No 883/2004, (EU) No 492/2011, and (EU) 2016/589 
and repealing Decision (EU) 2016/344 (OJ L 186, 11.7.2019, p. 21). 
34 Belgium, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal and 
Slovenia. Hungary and Malta informed that no concerted checks were carried out. 
35  Austria,  France,  Germany,  Ireland,  Italy,  Latvia,  Lithuania,  Luxembourg,  Poland,  Romania,  Slovakia  and 
Spain.  

9 

 
 
                                                           
Cooperation  between  Member  States  concerned  mostly  neighbouring  Member  States.  Also, 
as for the last reporting period, most of the Member States indicated that the cooperation took 
place within the framework of Euro Contrôle Route (ECR).  

II. Overview of the implementation of Directive 2002/15/EC 

According to Article 13 of Directive 2002/15/EC, Member States are obliged to report on its 
implementation and indicate the views of the two sides of industry every two years. 

1.  The scope of Directive 2002/15/EC  

The  Directive  establishes  rules  governing,  inter  alia,  adequate  breaks  during  the  working 
period,  the  maximum  weekly  working  time  and  night  work.  Its  provisions  supplement  the 
rules on driving times, breaks and rest periods established by Regulation (EC) No 561/2006. 
As this Directive lays down certain provisions concerning hours of work that are specific to 
the  road  transport  sector,  it  is  regarded  as  a  lex  specialis  to  the  general  Directive 
2003/88/EC36 on working time, which establishes basic requirements for the organisation of 
the working time of workers in all sectors. 

2.  Implementation aspects in Member States   

Some Member States and social partners reported some implementation issues. The German 
authorities  reported  a  general  lack  of  knowledge  of  the  legislation  on  driving  and  working 
times among employers. As reported, working time for mobile workers is usually checked for 
compliance  only  within  the  checks  on  driving  time  legislation  and  it  is  generally  not 
sufficiently respected.  

Malta informed that for the vehicles, which are not obliged to use tachographs in line with the 
exemption under Article 13(1)(e) of the Driving Time Regulation, the measuring of working 
time is done through existing means to measure driver's working times, e.g. punch clocks. 

A lack of inspectors for controlling working time was reported by some Member States. The 
Italian  authorities  pointed  out  the  problem  with  achieving  the  minimum  required  50%  of 
checks at the premises. The main problems are due to the particular complexity of the checks 
in  the  sector  and  the  considerable  effort  required  in  terms  of  human  resources.  During 
inspections  at  the  premises,  in  addition  to  checks  regarding  the  compliance  with  the  EU 
social legislation, workers’ social security and salary status are also checked. 

Sweden reported on the method used by the control authorities to monitor compliance with 
that part of the social legislation on which social partners have concluded agreements, e.g. on 
night  work.  In  such  cases,  the  Swedish  authorities  not  only  send  written  requests  to 
employers and self-employed drivers, but also personally contact the drivers being inspected. 
The objective is to raise awareness of the rules and trigger changes in behaviour.  

36 Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain 
aspects of the organisation of working time (OJ L 299, 18.11.2003, p.9). 

10 

 
 
                                                           
Some authorities also reported a need for further clarification of some definitions in Directive 
2002/15/EC.  In  Germany,  one  Land  called  for  further  clarification  on  how  to  deal  with 
“waiting times at the ramp”. It was also found that unloading work is often not recorded as 
‘other  work’,  but  as  rest  time.  In  some  cases,  businesses  also  distinguished  between  actual 
working  time  and  working  time  subject  to  remuneration,  so  as  time  was  recorded  and 
remunerated at a flat rate, but not as ‘other work’. 

Finally,  some  national  authorities  reported  difficulties  in  controlling  the  working  time  of 
drivers involved in different types of carriage activities or conducting transport operations for 
several employers.  

In contrast, Bulgaria informed that no significant problems were encountered in the exercise 
of controls under Directive 2002/15/EC.  

In  spite  of  these  shared  observations,  it  remains  difficult  to  identify  trends  and  outstanding 
issues at the EU level due to the significant number of incomplete submissions by Member 
States and different national practices. 

3.  Interpretation of Directive 2002/15/EC  

A few Member States reported judicial interpretation by national  courts interpreting  certain 
provisions of Directive 2002/15/EC in 2019-2020. Sweden reiterated that they were waiting 
for  a  court  ruling  in  a  case  related  to  the  demarcation  between  the  Swedish  Transport 
Agency’s  responsibilities  and  those  of  social  partners  when  collective  agreements  were 
signed  derogating  from  parts  of  the  national  legal  act  transposing  Directive  2002/15/EC. 
Sweden  also  informed  that  few  other  legal  disputes  concerning  the  implementation  of 
Directive 2002/15/EC had been settled by courts of first instance and that there have been no 
legal  decisions  by  the  supreme  court.  The  same  situation  was  reported  by  Estonia,  which 
confirmed  that,  in  general,  the  transposition  of  Directive  2002/15/EC  had  created  no  social 
problems in 2019-2020 in Estonia.  

Spain had a number of court cases related to working time, breaks, periods of availability and 
collective agreements regarding for example calculation of hours of presence at the disposal 
of  the  employer,  payments  for  more  than  20  hours  of  availability,  and  payments  of  daily 
subsistence allowance.  

4.  Offences against working time rules 

Only  eleven  Member  States37  provided  quantitative  data  on  the  offences  detected,  even 
though some of the data was not fully complete. This number is slightly higher compared to 
the  previous  reporting  period  where  nine  Member  States38  provided  this  information.  The 
insufficient number of contributions does not allow for EU-wide conclusions to be drawn. 

37  Austria,  Cyprus,  Czech  Republic,  Finland,  Germany,  Hungary,  Italy,  Luxembourg,  Poland,  Slovakia  and 
Spain.   
38 Austria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Ireland, Luxembourg and Poland. 

11 

 
 
                                                           
Some  Member  States  indicated  that  a  behaviour  correction  was  made  possible  within  a 
defined  period  to  avoid  the  imposition  of  a  penalty.  The  enforcement  authorities  will  only 
proceed  with  their  sanctions  in  cases  where  the  deficiency  failed  to  be  addressed.  In  this 
regard, the Swedish industry reported that the absence of direct sanction was appreciated, as 
it gives the employers and self-employed a chance to implement new ways of working, using 
new technologies or changing procedures to improve legal compliance. 

5.  Stakeholders' views on implementation of Directive 2002/15/EC 

As  required  by  Article  13  of  Directive  2002/15/EC,  ten  Member  States39  clearly  indicated 
that the two sides of industry had been consulted for the purpose of this reporting exercise. 
This number is slightly lower compared to the last report40, but still shows that more than a 
half of Member  States  do not involve social partners in reporting on the implementation of 
the working time rules. Austria explained that social partners were not consulted, but that the 
draft annual report is not only discussed in Parliament (Social Committee) but is also publicly 
available on the website of the Labour Inspectorate.  

In six out of the ten Member States41, the views of social partners were reflected in a separate 
section or paragraph.  

Opinions  from  social  partners  cannot  be  further  analysed,  as  they  do  not  constitute  a 
representative sample.  

III. Overview of enforcement activities for Council Directive 96/53/EC 

1.  Checks 

Article  10d(1)  of  Council  Directive  96/53/EC,  as  amended  by  Directive  EU  2015/719, 
requires  that  Member  States  take  specific  measures,  by  27  May  2021,  to  automatically 
identify vehicles or vehicle combinations in circulation that are likely to have exceeded the 
maximum  authorised  weight  and  that  should  therefore  be  checked  by  their  competent 
authorities  in  order  to  ensure  compliance  with  the  requirements  of  the  Weights  and 
Dimensions Directive.  According to the information provided by the Member States, Ireland 
and Germany are using automatic weighting system at least since 2019.  Article 10d(1)  also 
provides  for  the  possibility  to  use  the  automatic  systems  to  directly  establish  infringements 
and  impose  penalties,  in  which  case  those  systems  shall  be  certified.  According  to  the 
information provided by the Member States, no Member State have chosen to install certified 
systems. Therefore, after heavy-duty vehicles in circulation that are likely to have exceeded 
the maximum authorised weight are identified by means of automatic systems, such vehicles 
had  to  be  submitted  to  an  additional  weight  control  at  the  roadside  with  certified  scales  to 
establish the eventual infringements.  

39 Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, and Sweden. 
40 Last report indicated 12 Member States, including the United Kingdom.  
41 France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Portugal and Sweden.  

12 

 
 
                                                           
In  addition,  Article  10d(2)  requires  that  Member  States  carry  out  in  each  calendar  year  an 
appropriate  number  of  checks  on  the  weight  of  vehicles  or  vehicle  combinations  in 
circulation,  proportionate  to  the  total  number  of  vehicles  inspected  each  year  in  its 
territory. However, Council Directive 96/53/EC does not provide for an interpretation of what 
can be considered “proportionate”, leaving a certain margin of interpretation to the discretion 
of Member States as to how they implement this rule. On the other hand, Council Directive 
96/53/EC  does  not  require  Member  States  to  communicate  the  total  number  of  vehicles 
inspected  each  year  in  their  territories,  which  would  be  necessary  to  compare  and  obtain 
information about the actual proportion of controls on the maximum weights performed. 

1.1 Roadside checks 

In  total,  around  17  million  vehicles  and  vehicle  combinations  were  checked  at  the 
roadside  in  2019  and  2020  (11,350,448  vehicles  in  2019  and  5,810,609  in  2020)  in  the 
territories of the nineteen Member States that have provided total or partial data. The number 
of  controls  carried  out  is  very  uneven:    Ireland  performed  the  highest  number  of  controls 
(around  12.6  million  controls),  followed  by  far  by  Poland  (around  3  million  controls)  and 
Italy  (almost  600,000  controls).  This  can  be  attributed  to  the  exclusive  use  of  automatic 
weighting systems in Ireland42.  

According  to  the  comparable  sets  of  data  from  sixteen  Member  States43  the  number  of 
controls has increased by 2% in their territories. 

1.2 Offences 

More  than  half  million  offences  for  exceeding  the  maximum  weight  or  the  maximum 
axle  weight  were  detected  in  nineteen  Member  States  (285,065  offences  in  2019  and 
287,547 in 2020).  

According  to  the  comparable  sets  of  data  in  sixteen  Member  States44  for  the  period  2017-
2018 the number  of  offences  detected in their territories has increased by 4% in the period 
2019-2020.    

Overall,  according  to  the  available  data  3.3%  of  the  vehicles  or  vehicle  combinations 
controlled  were  overloaded.  This  percentage  varies  from  4.9%  in  2019  to  2.5%  in  2020, 
which could suggest, given the similar amount of controls performed in those two years, that 
compliance with the  weight rules have  increased. However, the figures  vary  greatly  among 
Member  States  and  there  are  other  circumstances,  such  as  the  locations,  days  and  times 
chosen  for  the  roadside  controls  and  the  experience/training  of  the  enforcement  officers 
performing  the  controls  that  can  significantly  influence  the  efficiency  of  such  controls, 
according to the information provided by the Member States. As an example of the variations 

42 All controls reported by Ireland are carried out by means of Weigh In Motion (WIM) systems. 
43 The Member States that submitted their national data for the full period 2017-2018 were Austria, Belgium, 
Bulgaria,  Denmark,  Estonia,  Finland,  Germany,  Greece,  Italy,  Latvia,  Luxembourg,  Netherlands,  Poland, 
Slovak Republic, Slovenia and Spain. 
44 The Member States that submitted their national data for the full period 2017-2018 were Austria, Belgium, 
Bulgaria,  Denmark,  Estonia,  Finland,  Germany,  Greece,  Italy,  Latvia,  Luxembourg,  Netherlands,  Poland, 
Slovak Republic, Slovenia and Spain. 

13 

 
 
                                                           
among  Member  States,  Estonia  reports  2,166  infractions  detected  out  of  2,929  controls 
carried  out  (72.2%  effectiveness),  while  Poland  reports  7,217  infractions  detected  out  of 
3,050,851 controls carried out (0.2% effectiveness). 

IV. Conclusions  

The general outcome of the analysis on the implementation and enforcement of the EU road 
transport  social  rules  show  that  the  overall  performance  as  regards  enforcement  and 
compliance levels in 2019-2020 remain stable compared to 2017-2018.  

However,  a  direct  comparison  of  the  implementation  and  enforcement  of  the  EU  road 
transport social rules in the two reporting periods, 2017-2018 and 2019-2020, is not possible 
due  to  the  specific  situation  related  to  the  Covid-19  crisis  and  the  fact  that  the  United 
Kingdom is not required anymore to report on their enforcement activities.   

The  Covid-19  crisis  had  a  negative  impact  on  the  number  of  checks  and  concerted  actions 
carried out by the Member States. Nevertheless, some trends can be mentioned. 

There is still a continuous decrease in the number of working days checked. Compared to the 
previous reporting periods, both the reported number of vehicles and the reported number of 
drivers checked at the roadside throughout the EU decreased. The decrease was also observed 
for the number of transport undertakings checked at the premises. At the same time, the ratio 
of the working days checked at the roadside and at the premises changed to the advantage of 
working days checked at  the  premises  (60% at the roadside and  40% at the  premises while 
73% and 27% respectively in the last report), which is a positive development bringing the 
ratio of these two types of controls closer to the legal requirements. 

Both the number of offences detected at the premises and at the roadside decreased compared 
to the last report, which can be explained by the reduced number of checks carried out. The 
detection  rate  at  premises  remains  higher  than  the  detection  rate  at  the  roadside,  which 
confirms  that  checks  at  the  premises  are  more  efficient  than  ad  hoc  roadside  controls. 
However, the detection rate at premises decreased compared to the last reporting period.    

Infringement  detection rates vary  significantly throughout the EU (from 0.12 to 8.39). This 
fact,  combined  with  the  trend  of  the  decreasing  number  of  working  days  checked  and  the 
limited enforcement capacities (human and financial resources, skills and control equipment) 
across the Member States, indicate that it is imperative to better target checks. The access to 
data, such as risk rating, at the roadside has high importance notably to better target controls 
and  to  reduce  unnecessary  ‘clean’  checks,  i.e.  checks  where  no  infringements  are  detected. 
The access to the risk rating data by roadside inspectors is made obligatory in line with new 
requirements  introduced  by  Mobility  Package  I45.  The  Commission  will  adopt  an 
implementing  act  on  the  modalities  of  this  access46.  Moreover,  the  Commission  will 
investigate  how  digitalisation  and  automation  technologies  could  help  to  make  controls  of 

46 In line with Article 16(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1071/2009 as amended by Regulation (EU) 2020/1055. 

14 

 
 
                                                           
 
compliance smarter (more effective, efficient, paperless, based on access to and exchange of 
digital data).  

to  knowledge-sharing,  and 

As  regards  concerted  and  joint  checks  among  Member  States,  it  clearly  appears  that  they 
contribute 
the 
understanding and enforcement of EU rules in force. Therefore, the Commission encourages 
the Member States to further strengthen their efforts in improving cooperation, through joint 
inspections  and  concerted  checks,  as  well  as  to  benefit  from  the  assistance  offered  by  the 
European Labour Authority. 

to  establishing  harmonised  approach 

to 

The shares of the different types of infringements remain similar to the last reporting period. 
At the premises, offences related to driving time records amount to nearly half of all detected 
offences indicating  difficulties with storing  the relevant data appropriately  by undertakings. 
In  contrast,  offences  related  to  rest  periods  and  driving  times  amount  to  almost  half  of  all 
detected offences at the roadside.   

As regards the implementation of Directive 2002/15/EC, the lack of detailed quantitative and 
qualitative  data  in  many  national  reports  makes  an  in-depth  assessment  difficult.  The 
Commission would like to stress the importance of this reporting exercise and reminds that a 
legal action can be launched against Member States failing to comply with the requirement to 
submit the information as required by Article 13 of Directive 2002/15/EC.  

With regard to the implementation of Council Directive 96/53/EC the lack of information 
from  many  Member  States  makes  conclusions  difficult.  With  this  in  mind,  the  general 
outcome  is  that,  while  the  overall  enforcement  and  compliance  levels  for  2019-2020  have 
both increased slightly (2% more controls and 4% more infractions detected as compared to 
2017-2018),  there  are  significant  differences  among  Member  States  in  the  number  of 
controls and infractions detected in a given period.    

These  differences  can  also  be  observed  in  the  efficiency  of  controls  measured  as  the 
percentage of infractions detected per control carried out.  

Given that weight-in-motions systems have to be implemented in all Member States from 27 
May 2021, future data analysis and comparison with the current sets of data will be crucial to 
draw conclusions on the performance and efficiency of these automatic systems.  

No general conclusion can be drawn as regards the appropriateness and proportionality of 
the controls on maximum weights. This is due, on the one hand, to the lack of an objective 
uniform  criteria  to  define  “proportionality”  in  the  legal  text.  Contrary  to  the  3%  criteria 
provided  for  in  Article  2  of  Directive  2006/22/EC,  Council  Directive  96/53/EC  leaves  a 
certain  margin  of  discretion  to  Member  States  as  to  how  they  implement  this  rule.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  Weights  and  Dimensions  Directive  does  not  require  Member  States  to 
communicate the total number of vehicles inspected each year in their territories either, which 
hinders the  assessment of the proportionality of  the weights controls also  from the  point of 
view of having a constant ratio, i.e. that the more vehicles that are inspected in the territory of 
a Member State, the more checks on the weight of vehicles will need to be carried out. 

15 

 
 
The Commission believes that the overall enforcement and compliance levels following the 
application  of  Mobility  Package  I,  will  be  improved  in  the  future  reporting  periods.    An 
implementing act adopted by the Commission on a harmonised risk rating formula47 allows 
enforcers to recognise quickly the profile of the company they intend to check and to know 
whether  a  company  has  a  low  risk  rating  (due  to  low-level  of  law  breaches)  or  a  high  risk 
rating  (high-level  of  law  breaches).  In  addition,  a  remote  early  detection  of  possible 
manipulation and misuse, will give enforcers a tool to select which vehicles to control. All of 
this should decrease the number of unnecessary checks and save resources on the side of both 
enforcers and drivers.   

The  Commission  will  continue  monitoring  the  implementation  of  the  social  rules  in  road 
transport  with  the  assistance  of  Member  States.  It  calls  on  Member  States  to  include  the 
views of both sides of industry on the implementation of the working time rules, as required 
by Directive 2002/15/EC.  

The Commission insists on the importance of the submission by Member States of full sets of 
data  on  the  implementation  of  Directive  2002/15/EC  and  its  enforcement  as  well  as  on  the 
enforcement  of  Council  Directive  96/53/EC  are  provided  for  the  next  reporting  period  in 
order to satisfy the requirements set out in Article 13 of Directive 2002/15/EC, Article 10g of 
Council Directive 96/53/EC and Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006.  

47 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/695 of 2 May 2022 laying down rules for the application 
of  Directive  2006/22/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  as  regards  the  common  formula  for 
calculating the risk rating of transport undertakings (OJ L 129, 3.5.2022, p. 33).  

16