Case C-210/10

Márton Urbán

v

Vám- és Pénzügyőrség Észak-alföldi Regionális Parancsnoksága

(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hajdú-Bihar Megyei Bíróság)

‛Road transport — Breach of the rules on the use of the tachograph — Obligation on Member States to establish proportionate penalties — Flat-rate fine — Proportionality of the penalty’

Summary of the Judgment

1. Transport — Road transport — Social provisions — Breaches of the rules on the use of record sheets for data registered on the tachograph — System of penalties providing for a flat-rate fine for all breaches of those rules, no matter how serious

   (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 561/2006, Art. 19(1) and (4); Council Regulation No 3821/85, Arts 13 to 16)

2. Transport — Road transport — Social provisions — Breaches of the rules on the use of record sheets for data registered on the tachograph — System of penalties laying down strict liability for breach of those rules

   (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 561/2006, Art. 19(1) and (4); Council Regulation No 3821/85)

1.  The requirement of proportionality laid down in Article 19(1) and (4) of Regulation No 561/2006 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport must be interpreted as precluding a system of penalties which provides for the imposition of a flat-rate fine for all breaches, no matter how serious, of the rules on the use of record sheets laid down in Articles 13 to 16 of Regulation No 3821/85 on recording equipment in road transport, as amended by Regulation No 561/2006.

   Since breaches of Regulations No 3821/85 and No 561/2006 do not all have the same degree of seriousness with regard to the objectives of those regulations which are, firstly, the improvement of the relevant drivers’ working conditions and of road safety and, secondly, the laying down of uniform rules with respect to common rules on driving times, drivers’ breaks and rest periods and their monitoring, application of a flat-rate fine for all breaches of the rules on the use of record sheets, without adjustment of the amount of the penalty in keeping with the seriousness of the breach, appears to be disproportionate in the light of the objectives pursued by the European Union legislation.

   (see paras 26, 33, 41, 44, operative part 1)

2.  The requirement of proportionality laid down in Article 19(1) and (4) of Regulation No 561/2006 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport must be interpreted as not precluding a system of penalties which lays down strict liability of drivers for breaches of the provisions of Regulation No 3821/85 on recording equipment in road transport, as amended by Regulation No 561/2006, concerning the use of record sheets.

   The institution of such a system may be justified, given that, on the one hand, that system is such as to encourage drivers to comply with the provisions of Regulation No 3821/85 and, on the other, road safety and improvements in the social conditions for drivers are matters of public interest.

   That requirement of proportionality must, however, be interpreted as precluding the severity of the penalty provided for by that system when it requires the national authorities responsible for penalising infringements of Regulations No 3821/85 and No 561/2006 to impose a fine at a flat rate almost equivalent to the average monthly net income of an employee in the Member State concerned, without being able to take account of the actual circumstances of the individual case and, if appropriate, to reduce the amount of that fine. That penalty system appears to be disproportionate, particularly in a case in which only one of 15 discs checked was found not to have been completed properly.

   (see paras 51, 55, 56, 58, 59, operative part 2)

Case C-210/10

Márton Urbán

v

Vám- és Pénzügyőrség Észak-alföldi Regionális Parancsnoksága

(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hajdú-Bihar Megyei Bíróság)

‛Road transport — Breach of the rules on the use of the tachograph — Obligation on Member States to establish proportionate penalties — Flat-rate fine — Proportionality of the penalty’

Summary of the Judgment

1. Transport — Road transport — Social provisions — Breaches of the rules on the use of record sheets for data registered on the tachograph — System of penalties providing for a flat-rate fine for all breaches of those rules, no matter how serious

   (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 561/2006, Art. 19(1) and (4); Council Regulation No 3821/85, Arts 13 to 16)

2. Transport — Road transport — Social provisions — Breaches of the rules on the use of record sheets for data registered on the tachograph — System of penalties laying down strict liability for breach of those rules

   (European Parliament and Council Regulation No 561/2006, Art. 19(1) and (4); Council Regulation No 3821/85)

1.  The requirement of proportionality laid down in Article 19(1) and (4) of Regulation No 561/2006 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport must be interpreted as precluding a system of penalties which provides for the imposition of a flat-rate fine for all breaches, no matter how serious, of the rules on the use of record sheets laid down in Articles 13 to 16 of Regulation No 3821/85 on recording equipment in road transport, as amended by Regulation No 561/2006.

   Since breaches of Regulations No 3821/85 and No 561/2006 do not all have the same degree of seriousness with regard to the objectives of those regulations which are, firstly, the improvement of the relevant drivers’ working conditions and of road safety and, secondly, the laying down of uniform rules with respect to common rules on driving times, drivers’ breaks and rest periods and their monitoring, application of a flat-rate fine for all breaches of the rules on the use of record sheets, without adjustment of the amount of the penalty in keeping with the seriousness of the breach, appears to be disproportionate in the light of the objectives pursued by the European Union legislation.

   (see paras 26, 33, 41, 44, operative part 1)

2.  The requirement of proportionality laid down in Article 19(1) and (4) of Regulation No 561/2006 on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport must be interpreted as not precluding a system of penalties which lays down strict liability of drivers for breaches of the provisions of Regulation No 3821/85 on recording equipment in road transport, as amended by Regulation No 561/2006, concerning the use of record sheets.

   The institution of such a system may be justified, given that, on the one hand, that system is such as to encourage drivers to comply with the provisions of Regulation No 3821/85 and, on the other, road safety and improvements in the social conditions for drivers are matters of public interest.

   That requirement of proportionality must, however, be interpreted as precluding the severity of the penalty provided for by that system when it requires the national authorities responsible for penalising infringements of Regulations No 3821/85 and No 561/2006 to impose a fine at a flat rate almost equivalent to the average monthly net income of an employee in the Member State concerned, without being able to take account of the actual circumstances of the individual case and, if appropriate, to reduce the amount of that fine. That penalty system appears to be disproportionate, particularly in a case in which only one of 15 discs checked was found not to have been completed properly.

   (see paras 51, 55, 56, 58, 59, operative part 2)