91996E2306

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2306/96 by Carlos Robles Piquer (PPE) to the Commission (27 August 1996)

Subject: Freedom of movement as regards medical prescriptions

The ease of movement throughout the Union arising from the four fundamental freedoms frequently produces situations where Community citizens who are in a Member State other than their Member State of origin are obliged to ask for a medicine for which they have a prescription issued in their place of origin.

In many cases, citizens in this position have been unpleasantly surprised to find that chemists in another Member State have refused to supply the medicine prescribed, arguing that the prescription is not valid in the Member State where the person happens, for personal reasons, to be.

Can the Commission explain on what grounds a chemist in a Member State can refuse to accept a prescription issued by a doctor in another Member State, and what Community legislation can be invoked by any Union citizen wishing to be supplied with a medicine on the basis of a prescription issued by any doctor in any Member State?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (30 October 1996)

The Commission takes the view that a rule prohibiting chemists established in a Member State from accepting a prescription for personal use outside the social security systems issued by a doctor established in another Member State goes beyond what is necessary for the purposes of protecting public health and is contrary to Community law, particularly in respect of freedom to provide services (Article 59 of the EC Treaty).

Article 1 of Directive 92/26/EEC ((OJ L 113, 30.4.1992. )) concerning the classification for the supply of medicinal products defines a medicinal prescription as 'any prescription issued by a professional person qualified to prescribe medicinal products', and does not lay down any conditions regarding the nationality, place of residence or place of establishment of the prescribing doctor.

In addition, the conditions governing access to the professions of doctor and chemist, and the conditions in which these professions are practised, were harmonized by the 'doctors' Directives 75/362/EEC and 75/363/EEC ((OJ L 167, 30.6.1975. )) (consolidated by Directive 93/16/EEC ((OJ L 165, 7.7.1993. ))) and by the 'pharmacists' Directives 85/432/EEC and 85/433/EEC. ((OJ L 253, 24.9.1985. )) As a result, a medical prescription issued by a doctor established in another Member State provides the same guarantees for patients as a prescription issued by a doctor in the Member State in question. The same holds for medicines purchased from chemists in another Member State. The Court of Justice has taken that view in its judgments of 7 March 1989 (C-215/87 Schumacher) and 8 April 1992 (C-62/90 Commission v Germany). A further implication of this case-law is that EU citizens have the right to acquire medicine for their personal use without restriction within the Community when such medicine has been lawfully prescribed or dispensed, and to obtain it when travelling within the Community.

However, chemists or other persons qualified to prescribe medicinal products can still refuse to honour a prescription if there are any doubts as to its authenticity, as might be the case for prescriptions which are likely to be misused or diverted to illegal purposes (special medical prescriptions mainly concerning narcotics or psychotropic substances and provided for under Article 3(2) of Directive 92/26/EEC).

The Commission therefore takes the view that individual refusals by chemists to honour prescriptions are not contrary to Community law, but that a general rule prohibiting chemists from honouring prescriptions is contrary to that law. The fact that the doctor issuing a medical prescription is established in another Member State cannot be an automatic criterion for refusing to honour it.