CELEX: C2004/118/54
Language: en
Date: 2004-04-30 00:00:00
Title: Order of the Court of Justice (Fourth Chamber) of 1 April 2004 in Case C-184/03 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht für Zivilrechtssachen Wien): Helmut Fröschl v Republik Österreich (Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure — Proof of competence required in order to exercise a profession — Equivalent — Conditions — Professional experience acquired in another Member State — Principle of non-discrimination — Freedom of establishment — Freedom to provide services)

30.4.2004   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 118/30
            
         
      ORDER OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE
   
   (Fourth Chamber)
   of 1 April 2004
   in Case C-184/03 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht für Zivilrechtssachen Wien): Helmut Fröschl v Republik Österreich (1)
   
   (Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure - Proof of competence required in order to exercise a profession - Equivalent - Conditions - Professional experience acquired in another Member State - Principle of non-discrimination - Freedom of establishment - Freedom to provide services)
   (2004/C 118/54)
   Language of the case: German
   In Case C-184/03: reference to the Court under Article 234 EC by the Landesgericht für Zivilrechtssachen Wien (Austria), seeking to obtain, in the proceedings pending before that court between Helmut Fröschl and Republik Österreich, a preliminary ruling relating to the interpretation of Articles 12 EC, 43 EC and 49 EC – the Court (Fourth Chamber), composed of J.N. Cunha Rodrigues (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber; F. Macken and K. Lenaerts, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, made an order on 1 April 2004, the operative part of which is as follows:
   Articles 12 EC, 43 EC and 49 EC must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation under which, in a situation like that at issue in the main proceedings, professional experience is not recognised as equivalent to possession of the proof of competence required in order to work as a self-employed photographer, on the sole ground that that experience was acquired in the Member State of establishment and not in another Member State.
   
      (1)  OJ C 47 of 21. 2. 2004.