CELEX: C2000/259/08
Language: en
Date: 2000-09-09 00:00:00
Title: Case C-246/00: Action brought on 20 June 2000 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Kingdom of the Netherlands

9.9.2000               EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                         C 259/5
Contrary to the view taken by the Federal Republic of Germany,         The applicant claims that the Court should:
the content in pollutants of the individual components of
the waste burned can have no impact on the classification of
the burning as recovery or disposal. Article 4 of Directi-
ve 75/442/EEC does impose an obligation on Member States
to ensure that waste is disposed of or recovered in such a way         (1) declare that, by adopting Articles 107(1), 108(1)(h), 109
as not to damage the environment or endanger human health,                   and 111(1)(a) of the Wegenverkeerswet (Road Traffic
but the provision contains nothing on the distinction between                Law) 1994 and Article 100 of the Reglement Rijbewijzen
disposal and recovery. Moreover, reference should be made in                 (Rules on Driving Licences), the Kingdom of the Nether-
this context to the system that underlies Regulation (EEC)                   lands has failed to comply with its obligations under
No 259/93; both the competent authorities in the dispatching                 Articles 1(2) and 6(1)(c) and point 4 in Annex III to
State and the authorities in the receiving State may raise                   Council Directive 91/439/EEC of 29 July 1991 on driving
objections to waste shipments on grounds that are set out in                 licences (OJ L 237 of 24 August 1991, p. 1) and thus
detail. According to the regulation, the pollutant content of                with its obligations under the EC Treaty;
the waste or compliance with emission rules by the plant
which burns it are not parameters for the raising of objections.
The obligations under Article 4 of the regulation apply to
every Member State within its territory irrespective of the            (2) order the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs.
shipment procedure.
The Commission is further of the opinion that Member States
may not set up criteria which lead to the directive’s provisions
on the demarcation of types of recovery not being complied
with. It is true that, on the current wording of Directi-
ve 75/442/EEC, it is difficult to distinguish between recovery         Pleas in law and main arguments
and disposal in individual cases. The Commission’s staff had
therefore provided for a criterion of heating value in a working
document. At the present time, however, the Commission’s
staff are preparing other solutions, which are subsequently to
be incorporated into Directive 75/442/EEC through technical            —     Infringement of Article 1(2) of Directive 91/439,
                                                                             resulting from the introduction of a compulsory, system-
adaptation of the annexes on the basis of Article 17.
                                                                             atic scheme of registration after one year of establishment
                                                                             in the Netherlands: it follows from the objective and
                                                                             scope of Article 1(1) of the directive, and also from the
(1) OJ L 30, 6.2.1993, p. 1.                                                 usual meaning of the wording of Article 1(2) thereof, that
(2) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975, p. 47.                                              driving licences which have been issued by another
                                                                             Member State without any formal requirements must be
                                                                             recognised by the authorities of the host Member State.
                                                                             The holder of a driving licence issued in accordance with
                                                                             the European model is no longer obliged to exchange
                                                                             that licence upon becoming established in another Mem-
                                                                             ber State. This means that the holder is spared from
                                                                             having to incur administrative expenses upon becoming
                                                                             established and also, of course, upon subsequently
                                                                             returning to the Member State in which the licence was
                                                                             issued or on subsequently moving to a third Member
Action brought on 20 June 2000 by the Commission of                          State. In order effectively to avoid such impediments, the
the European Communities against the Kingdom of the                          mutual recognition provided for in Article 1(2) must take
                           Netherlands                                       place ‘without any formality’. Under the Netherlands
                                                                             Wegenverkeerswet (Road Traffic Law) 1994, mutual
                                                                             recognition without any formality occurs only if the
                         (Case C-246/00)                                     holder establishes himself in the Netherlands for less than
                                                                             one year. Driving licences which are not registered within
                                                                             one year after establishment cease to be valid for use in
                         (2000/C 259/08)                                     the Netherlands. Driving a vehicle in the Netherlands
                                                                             with such a driving licence is equivalent to driving
                                                                             without a licence. The Kingdom of the Netherlands has
An action against the Kingdom of the Netherlands was                         in fact replaced the obligation to exchange a licence, as
brought before the Court of Justice on 20 June 2000 by the                   laid down by Directive 80/1263 but criticised in the
Commission of the European Communities, represented by                       ninth recital in the preamble to Directive 91/439 and
M. Wolfcarius, Legal Adviser, and H.M.H. Speyart, of its Legal               in paragraph 26 of the Skanavi judgment (1), with a
Service, acting as Agents, with an address for service in                    registration obligation. This conflicts with the system of
Luxembourg at the office of C. Gómez de la Cruz, of its Legal               mutual recognition of driving licences issued by Member
Service, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg.                                           States, as laid down in Article 1(2) of Directive 91/439.
 ---pagebreak--- C 259/6                EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                           9.9.2000
      Article 1(3) of Directive 91/439 cannot be invoked in               Action brought on 26 June 2000 by the Commission of
      order to justify a compulsory, systematic scheme for the            the European Communities against the Kingdom of the
      registration of licences issued by other Member States.                                         Netherlands
      The view taken by the Netherlands authorities is based
      on a misapprehension of the relationship between                                              (Case C-254/00)
      Article 1(2) and Article 1(3) of the directive and between
      the directive and Article 43 EC. In addition, the measures                                    (2000/C 259/09)
      applied by the Netherlands authorities are dispro-
      portionate.                                                         An action against the Kingdom of the Netherlands was brought
                                                                          before the Court of Justice of the European Communities
                                                                          on 26 June 2000 by the Commission of the European
—     Infringement of Article 1(2) of Directive 91/439,                   Communities, represented by H. van Lier, Legal Adviser in the
      resulting from the reduction in the period of validity of a         Commission’s Legal Service, acting as Agent, with an address
      driving licence issued by another Member State following            for service in Luxembourg at the office of C. Gómez de la
      the date of issue in that Member State: the Netherlands             Cruz, also of the Legal Service, Wagner Centre.
      authorities apply the national rules concerning the val-
      idity of licences as from the time of becoming established          The applicant claims that the Court should:
      in the Netherlands. In that respect too, the Netherlands
      authorities have misapprehended the relationship                    1.    Declare that, by failing to notify all of the laws, regulations
      between Article 1(2) and Article 1(3) of the directive,                   and administrative provisions necessary for compliance
      in that, for a great many licence-holders, the mutual                     with Directive 95/47/EC of the European Parliament and
      recognition provided for by Article 1(2) is ineffective. The              of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the use of
      Netherlands authorities have misunderstood the notion                     standards for the transmission of television signals (1) or
      of ‘mutual recognition’: this does not mean that holders                  by failing to adopt the measures necessary for that
      of driving licences issued by the Netherlands and by other                purpose, the Kingdom of the Netherlands has failed to
      Member States must be treated in the same way, but that                   fulfil its obligations under that directive;
      the legal effects attaching to driving licences issued by
                                                                          2.    Order the Kingdom of the Netherlands to pay the costs.
      another Member State are the same as in the issuing
      Member State. The aim is not to allow discrimination
      against holders of Netherlands driving licences by com-             Pleas in law and main arguments
      parison with holders of other driving licences, but to
      prevent a situation in which the latter group are faced             In view of the mandatory nature of the third paragraph of
      with obstacles to the exercise of freedom of establishment          Article 249 EC, Member States are required to adopt the
      in the Netherlands.                                                 measures necessary for compliance with directives which are
                                                                          addressed to them, and to do so before the expiry of the period
                                                                          specified therein. That period expired on 23 August 1996
—     Infringement of Article 6(1)(c) of Directive 91/439: the            without the Netherlands having adopted the requisite pro-
      Netherlands statute prescribes a minimum age of 18 for              visions.
      drivers of category D vehicles, whereas, in accordance
      with Article 6(1)(c) of the directive, that age should be           (1) OJ 1995 L 281, p. 51.
      21.
—     Infringement of point 4 in Annex III to Directive 91/439:
      inasmuch as Article 100 of the (Netherlands) Reglement
      Rijbewijzen (Rules on Driving Licences) does not provide            Reference for a preliminary ruling by the High Court of
      for a periodic medical examination for Group 2 drivers              Justice (England & Wales), Queen’s Bench Division
      (lorry drivers and bus drivers), it is contrary to point 4 in       (Crown Office), by order of that court of 21 June 2000, in
      Annex III to the directive.                                         the case of the Commissioners of Customs and Excise
                                                                                     against the Zoological Society of London
                                                                                                    (Case C-267/00)
(1) Judgment of the Court of Justice of 29 February 1996 in Case                                    (2000/C 259/10)
    C-193/94 Skanavi [1996] ECR I-929.
                                                                          Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                                                                          European Communities by an order of the High Court of
                                                                          Justice (England & Wales), Queen’s Bench Division (Crown
                                                                          Office) of 21 June 2000, which was received at the Court
                                                                          Registry on 3 July 2000, for a preliminary ruling in the case of
                                                                          the Commissioners of Customs and Excise against the Zoologi-
                                                                          cal Society of London, on the following questions: