This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62018CA0203
Joined Cases C-203/18 and C-374/18: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 21 November 2019 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Oberve-waltungsgericht für das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen, Landgericht Köln — Germany) — Deutsche Post AG, Klaus Leymann v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen (C-203/18) and UPS Deutschland Inc. & Co. OHG, DPD Dynamic Parcel Distribution GmbH & Co. KG, Bundesverband Paket & Expresslogistik e.V. v Deutsche Post AG (C-374/18) (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 — Road transport — Social legislation — Vehicles used to deliver items as part of the universal postal service — Exceptions — Vehicles partly used for such delivery — Directive 97/67/EC — Article 3(1) — ‘Universal service’ — Concept)
Joined Cases C-203/18 and C-374/18: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 21 November 2019 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Oberve-waltungsgericht für das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen, Landgericht Köln — Germany) — Deutsche Post AG, Klaus Leymann v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen (C-203/18) and UPS Deutschland Inc. & Co. OHG, DPD Dynamic Parcel Distribution GmbH & Co. KG, Bundesverband Paket & Expresslogistik e.V. v Deutsche Post AG (C-374/18) (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 — Road transport — Social legislation — Vehicles used to deliver items as part of the universal postal service — Exceptions — Vehicles partly used for such delivery — Directive 97/67/EC — Article 3(1) — ‘Universal service’ — Concept)
Joined Cases C-203/18 and C-374/18: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 21 November 2019 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Oberve-waltungsgericht für das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen, Landgericht Köln — Germany) — Deutsche Post AG, Klaus Leymann v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen (C-203/18) and UPS Deutschland Inc. & Co. OHG, DPD Dynamic Parcel Distribution GmbH & Co. KG, Bundesverband Paket & Expresslogistik e.V. v Deutsche Post AG (C-374/18) (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 — Road transport — Social legislation — Vehicles used to deliver items as part of the universal postal service — Exceptions — Vehicles partly used for such delivery — Directive 97/67/EC — Article 3(1) — ‘Universal service’ — Concept)
IO C 27, 27.1.2020, p. 4–4
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
- Date of document:
- 21/11/2019
- Date lodged:
- 20/03/2018
- Author:
- An Chúirt Bhreithiúnais
- Form:
- Faisnéis bhreithiúnach
- Authentic language:
- Gearmáinis
- Type of procedure:
- Tarchur le haghaidh réamhrialú
- Link
- Select all documents mentioning this document
- Case affecting:
-
- Related EU case-law document 62018CJ0203
- Instruments cited in case law:
- Link
- EUROVOC descriptor:
|
27.1.2020 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 27/4 |
Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 21 November 2019 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Oberve-waltungsgericht für das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen, Landgericht Köln — Germany) — Deutsche Post AG, Klaus Leymann v Land Nordrhein-Westfalen (C-203/18) and UPS Deutschland Inc. & Co. OHG, DPD Dynamic Parcel Distribution GmbH & Co. KG, Bundesverband Paket & Expresslogistik e.V. v Deutsche Post AG (C-374/18)
(Joined Cases C-203/18 and C-374/18) (1)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 - Road transport - Social legislation - Vehicles used to deliver items as part of the universal postal service - Exceptions - Vehicles partly used for such delivery - Directive 97/67/EC - Article 3(1) - ‘Universal service’ - Concept)
(2020/C 27/04)
Language of the case: German
Referring courts
Oberverwaltungsgericht für das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen, Landgericht Köln
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: Deutsche Post AG, Klaus Leymann (C-203/18), UPS Deutschland Inc. & Co. OHG, DPD Dynamic Parcel Distribution GmbH & Co. KG, Bundesverband Paket & Expresslogistik e.V. (C-374/18)
Defendants: Land Nordrhein-Westfalen (C-203/18), Deutsche Post AG (C-374/18)
Operative part of the judgment
|
1. |
A provision of national law, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which reproduces verbatim the provisions of Article 13(1)(d) of Regulation (EC) No 561/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport and amending Council Regulations (EEC) No 3821/85 and (EC) No 2135/98 and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85, as amended by Regulation (EU) No 165/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 February 2014, must — in so far as it applies to vehicles with a maximum permissible mass of more than 2.8 tonnes but not exceeding 3.5 tonnes and which, as a result, do not fall within the scope of Regulation No 561/2006, as amended by Regulation No 165/2014 — be interpreted exclusively on the basis of EU law, as interpreted by the Court of Justice, where those provisions have, directly and unconditionally, been rendered applicable to such vehicles by national law. |
|
2. |
Article 13(1)(d) of Regulation No 561/2006, as amended by Regulation No 165/2014, must be interpreted as meaning that the exception which it lays down covers only vehicles or combinations of vehicles that are used exclusively, during a particular transport operation, for the purpose of delivering items as part of the universal postal service. |
|
3. |
Article 3(1) of Directive 97/67/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 1997 on common rules for the development of the internal market of Community postal services and the improvement of quality of service, as amended by Directive 2008/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 February 2008, must be interpreted as meaning that the fact that add-on services — such as collection with or without a time slot, a minimum age check, cash on delivery, postage payment by recipient up to 31.5 kilograms, redirection service, instructions in the event of non-delivery and a preferred delivery day and time — are provided in connection with an item precludes that item from being regarded as being delivered within the scope of the ‘universal service’ under that provision and, therefore, as being an item delivered ‘as part of the universal service’ for the purposes of applying the exception provided for in Article 13(1)(d) of Regulation No 561/2006, as amended by Regulation No 165/2014. |
