CELEX: C2003/019/40
Language: en
Date: 2003-01-25 00:00:00
Title: Case C-433/02: Action brought on 29 November 2002 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Kingdom of Belgium

25.1.2003               EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                          C 19/23
     seq EC), the right of establishment (Article 43 et seq. EC)                      nationals on the basis of periods of study completed
     and freedom to provide services (Article 49 et seq. EC), as                      with foreign institutions operating in Italy even
     interpreted by the Court of Justice. Of particular relevance                     though they are approved and accredited by the
     in that regard are national rules and/or administrative                          competent public authorities in the Member State to
     practices which:                                                                 which they belong;
                                                                                 —    require production of an attestation from the diplo-
     —      impede the Italian establishment of a limited com-                        matic representation — Italian consulate in the
            pany whose principal business is in the United                            foreign country in which the degree was awarded —
            Kingdom from carrying on in the host state the                            proving actual residence in that country by the
            business of organising and administering courses of                       person concerned for the whole period of the
            study for preparation for university examinations,                        university studies;
            for which the company is duly authorised and
            accredited by the United Kingdom public auth-
            orities?                                                             —    limit recognition of degrees ‘solely’ to pursuit of a
                                                                                      profession already pursued in the State of origin,
                                                                                      thus precluding recognition for the purposes of
                                                                                      access to a regulated profession even though not
     —      discriminate as between nationals pursuing the same                       previously exercised.
            activities;
                                                                          3.     What is the meaning and scope of the expression ‘harmful
                                                                                 interruption (...) of vocational training’ in Council
     —      prohibit and/or seriously impede the Italian estab-
                                                                                 Decision 63/266/EEC (3) and does it cover the creation at
            lishment of that undertaking in obtaining, in another
                                                                                 national level by the public authorities of a permanent
            Member State and for valuable consideration, the
                                                                                 system of information which evidences that degrees
            services conducive to the pursuit of the abovemen-
                                                                                 awarded by a university, even though legally recognised
            tioned activity;
                                                                                 in the United Kingdom, cannot be recognised under
                                                                                 national legislation if they have been obtained on the
                                                                                 basis of periods of study completed in Italy.
     —      discourage students from enrolling in those courses
            of study;
                                                                          (1 ) OJ L 19 of 24.1.1989, p. 16.
                                                                          (2 ) OJ C 109 of 4.5.2002, p. 2.
     —      impede the professional training of enrolled students         (3 ) OJ 63 of 20.4.1963, p. 1338 (English special edition...: Series-I
            and the obtaining of an award capable of conferring                (63-64) p. 25).
            on its holder advantages either in securing access to
            a professional activity or in exercising it with greater
            reward in other Member States as well.
2.   On an interpretation — herein requested — of Article 2
     of Council Directive 89/48/EC ( 1), does that directive
     confer rights which may be relied on also before acqui-
     sition of the degree mentioned in Article 1 of the directive
     itself. If the reply to that question is affirmative, does the       Action brought on 29 November 2002 by the Com-
     directive itself, regard also being had to the judgment in           mission of the European Communities against the
     Case C-145/99 Commission v Italian Republic [2001] (2),                                     Kingdom of Belgium
     permit rules or administrative practices in the national
     legal order which:
                                                                                                   (Case C-433/02)
     —      make recognition of university degrees obtained on
            completion of training of at least three years’                                         (2003/C 19/40)
            duration subject to the discretion of the public
            authorities;
     —      grant recognition in Italy of degrees awarded by              An action against the Kingdom of Belgium was brought
            universities recognised in the United Kingdom only            before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
            if completed after regular attendance for the whole           29 November 2002 by the Commission of the European
            course of studies at those universities, to the               Communities, represented by K. Banks, acting as Agent, with
            exclusion therefore of degrees awarded to Italian             an address for service in Luxembourg.
 ---pagebreak--- C 19/24                 EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                          25.1.2003
The Commission of the European Communities claims that                         during the years 1999 and 2000, Ireland has failed to
the Court should:                                                              fulfil its obligations under Article 5 (1) of Directive 95/
                                                                               21/EC of 19 June 1995 on port State control of
—     Declare that, by failing to apply the provisions on the                  shipping (1);
      public lending right set out in Directive 92/100/EEC of
      19 November 1992 on rental right and lending right and            2)     order Ireland to pay the costs.
      on certain rights related to copyright in the field of
      intellectual property, (1) the Kingdom of Belgium has
      failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 1 and 5 of
      that Directive;
                                                                        Pleas in law and main arguments
—     Order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs of the
      proceedings.
                                                                        Article 5(1) of Directive 95/21/EC, in its wording at the
                                                                        material time, imposes an obligation on each Member State to
                                                                        inspect at least 25 % of the number of individual foreign ships
Pleas in law and main arguments                                         which enter its ports in a given year. It is clear from the facts
                                                                        that Ireland failed to fulfil this obligation for the years
                                                                        1999 and 2000 because in those years it inspected 7,5 % and
Although Belgium has provided for a right to remuneration
                                                                        14,6 % respectively of the number of ships that entered its
for authors in those cases in which the latter cannot prohibit
                                                                        ports.
lending, none of the implementing measures provided for by
Article 63 of the Law of 30 June 1994 on copyright
and related rights has been adopted and the amount of
remuneration has therefore never been fixed.                            (1 ) Council Directive 95/21/EC of 19 June 1995 concerning the
                                                                             enforcement, in respect of shipping using Community ports and
                                                                             sailing in the waters under the jurisdiction of the Member States,
The Belgian authorities err in invoking difficulties in dis-                 of international standards for ship safety, pollution prevention
                                                                             and shipboard living and working conditions (port State control)
tinguishing the categories of establishments which may be                    (OJ L 157, 07.07.1995, p. 1).
exempted under Article 5(3) of the Directive. If the circum-
stances prevailing in the Member State in question do not
make it possible to draw a valid distinction between categories
of establishments, the solution must lie in imposing the
obligation to pay the remuneration in question on all of the
establishments concerned.
( 1) OJ 1992 L 346 of 27.11.1992, p. 61.
                                                                        Action brought on 4 December 2002 by the Commission
                                                                        of the European Communities against the French Republic
                                                                                                   (Case C-439/02)
Action brought on 2 December 2002 by the Commission                                                 (2003/C 19/42)
        of the European Communities against Ireland
                          (Case C-436/02)
                                                                        An action against the French Republic was brought before the
                           (2003/C 19/41)                               Court of Justice of the European Communities on 4 December
                                                                        2002 by the Commission of the European Communities,
                                                                        represented by K. Simonsson and W. Wils, acting as Agents.
An action against Ireland was brought before the Court of
Justice of the European Communities on 2 December 2002 by               The applicant claims that the Court should:
the Commission of the European Communities, represented
by Knut Simonsson, acting as agent, with an address for service
                                                                        1.     Declare that, by failing to carry out a number of annual
in Luxembourg.                                                                 inspections corresponding to at least 25 % of the number
                                                                               of individual vessels entering its ports in 1999 and 2000,
The Applicant claims that the Court should:                                    the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations
                                                                               under Council Directive 95/21/EC of 19 June 1995
1)    declare that, by failing to carry out an annual total                    concerning port State control (1);
      number of inspections corresponding to at least 25 % of
      the number of individual ships which entered its ports            2.     Order the French Republic to pay the costs.