This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 61998CJ0421
Summary of the Judgment
Summary of the Judgment
1. Freedom of movement for persons - Freedom of establishment - Freedom to provide services - Architects - Recognition of diplomas and qualifications - National legislation restricting the exercise of activities as an architect according to the definition of the profession in the Member State in which the relevant qualification was obtained - Not permissible
(Council Directive 85/384, Arts 2 and 10)
2. Freedom of movement for persons - Freedom of establishment - Restrictions - Article 56 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 46 EC) - Purpose - Existence of directives on the approximation of laws - Effects
(Art. 56 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Art. 46 EC))
1. A Member State which does not allow persons holding qualifications in architecture awarded by another Member State and recognised under Directive 85/384 on the mutual recognition of diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications in architecture, including measures to facilitate the effective exercise of the right of establishment and freedom to provide services, to pursue activities other than those which they are authorised to pursue in their country of origin on the basis of the qualifications awarded by the latter, unless they collaborate with another member of the profession who is authorised to pursue those activities and who holds a qualification which is likewise recognised under the law of the host Member State, is in breach of its obligations under Articles 2 and 10 of that directive.
It follows from Articles 2 and 10 of Directive 85/384 that, when an activity is usually pursued by architects holding a qualification awarded by the host Member State, a migrant architect holding a diploma, certificate or other evidence of formal qualifications coming within the scope of the directive must also be able to pursue such an activity, even if his diploma, certificate or other evidence of formal qualifications is not necessarily substantively equivalent in terms of the training received. While it is true that it is for the national legislation of the host Member State to define the field of activities covered by the profession of architect, once an activity is regarded by a Member State as coming within that field, the requirement of mutual recognition means that migrant architects must also be able to pursue that activity.
( see paras 37, 38, 45 and operative part 1 )
2. Article 56 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 46 EC) is not designed to reserve certain matters to the exclusive jurisdiction of Member States but permits national laws to derogate from the principle of free movement to the extent to which such derogation is and continues to be justified for the attainment of the objectives referred to therein. Where Community directives provide for harmonisation of the measures necessary to ensure the protection of a specific objective, recourse to Article 56 of the Treaty is no longer justified and the appropriate checks must be carried out and measures of protection adopted within the framework outlined by the harmonising directive in question.
( see paras 41-42 )