CELEX: 62013CA0477
Language: en
Date: 2015-04-16 00:00:00
Title: Case C-477/13: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 16 April 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht — Germany) — Eintragungsausschuss bei der Bayerischen Architektenkammer v Hans Angerer (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 2005/36/EC — Article 10 — Recognition of professional qualifications — Access to the profession of architect — Titles not listed in Annex V, point 5.7.1 — Concepts of ‘specific and exceptional reasons’ and ‘architect’)

15.6.2015   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 198/5
            
         Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 16 April 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesverwaltungsgericht — Germany) — Eintragungsausschuss bei der Bayerischen Architektenkammer v Hans Angerer
   (Case C-477/13) (1)
   
   ((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2005/36/EC - Article 10 - Recognition of professional qualifications - Access to the profession of architect - Titles not listed in Annex V, point 5.7.1 - Concepts of ‘specific and exceptional reasons’ and ‘architect’))
   (2015/C 198/06)
   Language of the case: German
   
      Referring court
   
   Bundesverwaltungsgericht
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Applicant: Eintragungsausschuss bei der Bayerischen Architektenkammer
   
      Defendant: Hans Angerer
   
      intervening parties: Vertreter des Bundesinteresses beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht, Landesanwaltschaft Bayern als Vertreter des öffentlichen Interesses
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   
               1.
            
            
               Article 10(c) of Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 279/2009 of 6 April 2009, must be interpreted as meaning that an applicant wishing to benefit from the general system for recognition of evidence of training laid down in Chapter I of Title III of that directive must, in addition to holding formal qualifications not listed in Annex V, point 5.7.1 thereto, also establish the existence of ‘specific and exceptional reasons’.
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Article 10(c) of Directive 2005/36, as amended by Regulation No 279/2009, must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of ‘specific and exceptional reasons’, within the meaning of that provision, refers to the circumstances which gave rise to the fact that the applicant does not hold a formal qualification listed in Annex V, point 5.7.1, to that directive, it being understood that the applicant cannot rely on the fact that he holds professional qualifications which give him access, in his home Member State, to a profession other than that which he wishes to pursue in the host Member State.
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Article 10(c) of Directive 2005/36, as amended by Regulation No 279/2009, must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of ‘architect’, referred to in that provision, must be defined in the light of the legislation of the host Member State and, therefore, that it does not necessarily require the applicant to have training and experience which extends not only to the technical activities of planning, supervision and implementation, but also to creative, urban planning, economic and possibly historic building conservation activities.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 344, 23.11.2013.