CELEX: C2007/042/05
Language: en
Date: 2007-02-24 00:00:00
Title: Case C-40/05: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 11 January 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Överklagandenämnden för högskolan, Sweden) — Kaj Lyyski v Umeå universitet (Freedom of movement for workers — Article 39 CE — Obstacles — Vocational training — Teachers — Refusal to admit to a training course a candidate employed in a school in another Member State)

24.2.2007   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 42/3
            
         Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 11 January 2007 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Överklagandenämnden för högskolan, Sweden) — Kaj Lyyski v Umeå universitet
   (Case C-40/05) (1)
   
   (Freedom of movement for workers - Article 39 CE - Obstacles - Vocational training - Teachers - Refusal to admit to a training course a candidate employed in a school in another Member State)
   (2007/C 42/05)
   Language of the case: Swedish
   Referring court
   Överklagandenämnden för högskolan
   Parties to the main proceedings
   
      Applicant: Kaj Lyyski
   
      Defendant: Umeå universitet
   Re:
   Reference for a preliminary ruling — Överklagandenämnden för högskolan (Board of Appeals for Higher Education) — Interpretation of Community law and in particular of Article 12 EC — Professional training scheme organised to remedy a lack of qualified teachers in a Member State intended to allow teachers employed in schools to obtain the qualifications necessary for a contract unlimited as to time — Refusal to admit a candidate who is a national of that Member State but employed in a school in another Member State
   Operative part of the judgment
   Community law does not preclude national legislation which organises, on a provisional basis, training courses intended in the short term to meet the need for qualified teachers in a State from requiring that candidates for that training be employed in a school in that State, provided, however, that the manner in which that legislation is applied does not lead to the exclusion, as a matter of principle, of all applications made by teachers who are not employed in such a school without prior individual assessment of the merits of those applications in the light, inter alia, of the aptitude of the person concerned, and the possibility of monitoring the practical part of the training received or possibly of exempting that person from it.
   
      (1)  OJ C 93, 16.4.2005.