Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62012CA0492

    Case C-492/12: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 19 September 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État — France) — Conseil national de l’ordre des médecins v Ministre de l’Enseignement supérieur et de la Recherche, Ministre des Affaires sociales et de la Santé (Freedom of movement for persons — Freedom of establishment — Freedom to provide services — Directive 2005/36/EC — Recognition of professional qualifications — Dental profession — Specific nature and distinction from the medical profession — Common training)

    IO C 344, 23.11.2013, p. 36–36 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    23.11.2013   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 344/36


    Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 19 September 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État — France) — Conseil national de l’ordre des médecins v Ministre de l’Enseignement supérieur et de la Recherche, Ministre des Affaires sociales et de la Santé

    (Case C-492/12) (1)

    (Freedom of movement for persons - Freedom of establishment - Freedom to provide services - Directive 2005/36/EC - Recognition of professional qualifications - Dental profession - Specific nature and distinction from the medical profession - Common training)

    2013/C 344/62

    Language of the case: French

    Referring court

    Conseil d’État France

    Parties to the main proceedings

    Applicant: Conseil national de l’ordre des médecins

    Defendants: Ministre de l’Enseignement supérieur et de la Recherche, Ministre des Affaires sociales et de la Santé

    Intervening party: Conseil national de l’ordre des chirurgiens-dentistes

    Re:

    Request for a preliminary ruling — Conseil d’État — Interpretation of Article 36 of Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications (OJ 2005 L 255, p. 22) — Specific and distinctive nature of the profession of dental practitioner compared with the medical profession — Validity of national legislation introducing university training common to medical and dental students — Validity of legislation leading to the practice of the same specialty by doctors and dentists

    Operative part of the judgment

    1.

    (a)

    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 Regulation (EC) No 1137/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008, must be interpreted as not precluding the creation, by a Member State, of a specialised training course, either in the field of medicine or that of dentistry, the title of which does not correspond to those listed, in respect of that Member State, in Annex V to that directive. Such a specialised course may be open both to persons who have completed only a basic medical training course and to those who have completed and validated only studies in the context of a basic dental training course.

    (b)

    It is for the national court to verify:

    whether that specialised training course, in so far as it does not fulfil the requirements laid down by Articles 23 and 24 of the directive regarding basic medical and dental training, does not lead to the issuing of evidence of basic medical training or evidence of basic dental training, and

    whether the qualification awarded following the completion of that specialised training course does not authorise the practice of the core medical or dental profession by persons who do not possess evidence of formal qualifications in basic medical training or evidence of formal qualifications in basic dental training.

    2.

    Directive 2005/36, as amended by Regulation No 1137/2008, must be interpreted as not precluding medical subjects from forming part of a specialised training course in dentistry.


    (1)  OJ C 26, 26.1.2013.


    Top