Grzegorz Dorobek case

Last updated

Grzegorz Dorobek case
European stars.svg
Submitted 13 December 2011
Decided 2014 20 March
CaseC-639/11
CelexID 31999L0007
ECLI ECLI:EU:C:2014:173
ChamberFifth Chamber
Nationality of partiesPolish
Court composition
Judge-Rapporteur
E. Juhász
President
T. von Danwitz
Judges
Advocate General
Niilo Jääskinen

Case C-639/11 is case judged by the European Court of Justice. It is often referred to as the Grzegorz Dorobek case after the first of 16 complainants whose grievances were accepted by the European Commission as grounds for the commission to bring the case against the Republic of Poland. It specifically deals with whether vehicles with a steering wheel on the right hand side (normal in countries where vehicles drive on the left hand side of the road) must be given a registration number by the authorities in Poland (a country where vehicles drive on the right hand side of the road). More generally it deals with the citizens' rights of free movement, which form the basis of the European Project. It also deals with the right of the European Commission to give instructions to member countries and the strength of grounds needed for member states to ignore the general rights and specific instructions.

Contents

Events leading to the case

In January 2008, Grzegorz returned to Poland from the UK with a right hand drive Vauxhall Vectra. He submitted an application for registration of the vehicle to the district office in Końskich. The vehicle registry refused, citing the decree of the Minister of Infrastructure dated 31 December 2002 on the technical conditions of vehicles and of the scope of the necessary equipment. [1]

Court procedures in Poland

In March 2008 Grzegorz appealed to the Municipal Court of Appeal in Kielce basing his case on the law of the European Union. [2] “Member States may not on grounds relating to the steering equipment:

As the Local Government Appeal Court upheld the decision, in February 2009 Grzegorz filed a case before the Regional Administrative Court against the decision of the Municipal Court of Appeals. In April 2009, the Regional Administrative Court in Kielce dismissed the case, judgment (file II SA / Ke 157/ 09) and upheld the decision of the Municipal Court of Appeals.

In July 2009, Grzegorz took his case to the Supreme Administrative Court in Warsaw but in January 2010, the court dismissed the complaint (file I OSK 1148-1109). And so the administrative proceedings in Poland ended. [3] [4]

The case in the European Union

In October 2009, the European Commission sent a letter to the Government of the Republic of Poland regarding its breach of its obligations to comply with directives 70/311/EEC, 2007/46/EC and Article 28 of the Treaty establishing the European Community. The Polish government replied to the committee clarifying and reiterating its position on the registration of right hand drive vehicles.

In September 2010, the European Commission decided to send a reasoned opinion on the matter to the Polish authorities . The letter indicated that the commission would wait two months for a remedy of the deficiencies in Polish law after which it would refer the matter to the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg. [5] A year later, the European Commission referred the case to the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg. "The Commission considers that if a motor vehicle meets EU type-approval, it can be safe to drive in all Member States, irrespective of the adjustment to the right or left-hand traffic. The Commission believes that the obstacles in registering a car with the steering wheel on the right side violate the provisions of Directive 70/311/EEC, the Framework Directive 2007/46/EC and Article 34 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union." [6] On 8 June 2012 the President of the Court of Justice of the European Union granted leave to intervene to the Republic of Lithuania. [7] On 7 November 2013 the Court of Justice of the European Union issued an opinion on C-639/11. [8] [9] [10]

The verdict delivered on 20 March 2014. The court decided that the Republic of Poland (also the Republic of Lithuania whose case was added) are breaking EU law by refusing to register right hand drive vehicles. The court refused to accept the Polish interpretation of the wording of European Union road vehicle regulations, also refused to accept the Polish argument that right hand drive vehicles would significantly affect road safety and found that the statistical analysis presented by the Polish Government did not meet the standards required for use in a court of law. [11] [12]

After the Judgement of the European Court of Justice

After the judgement of the European Court of Justice, Mr. Dorobek took his case to the Polish Supreme Administration Court. The court refused to reverse the decision of the lower courts on the grounds that the verdict of the European Court of Justice is case law which was not available to the lower court when they decided against him. The court did however allow some costs and opened the way for Mr Dorobek to recommence the process from square one. [13]

Initially the Polish Government gave indications to the Commission that they would comply with the court's judgement by the end of 2014. [14]

Having not complied, in February 2015 the Polish Government informed the Commission that it would not simply allow right hand drive vehicles to be dealt with in the same way as left hand drive vehicles; additional checks would be added to the annual roadworthiness tests. [15] This led to a three-month standstill to allow the Commission and other EU National Governments time to object if they wished to.

Once the period for challenges had passed the Polish Government published the new regulations on 2 July 2015. [16] The additional checks define that the vehicle must have headlights which dip to the right, rear fog lights on the left side, an external mirror on the left side of the vehicle which allows a 2.5M field of view at a distance of 10M to the rear of the mirror and a speedometer in km/h (possibly in addition to mp/h)

The ministerial order to allow registration of right hand drive vehicles was published on 31 July 2015, [17] and came into operation 14 days later on 15 August 2015.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">European Court of Justice</span> Supreme court in the European Union, part of the Court of Justice of the European Union

The European Court of Justice (ECJ), formally just the Court of Justice, is the supreme court of the European Union in matters of European Union law. As a part of the Court of Justice of the European Union, it is tasked with interpreting EU law and ensuring its uniform application across all EU member states under Article 263 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Directive (European Union)</span> Legislative act of the European Union

A directive is a legal act of the European Union that requires member states to achieve particular goals without dictating how the member states achieve those goals. A directive's goals have to be made the goals of one or more new or changed national laws by the member states before this legislation applies to individuals residing in the member states. Directives normally leave member states with a certain amount of leeway as to the exact rules to be adopted. Directives can be adopted by means of a variety of legislative procedures depending on their subject matter.

<i>R (Factortame Ltd) v Secretary of State for Transport</i> UK-Spanish legal case

R v Secretary of State for Transport was a judicial review case taken against the United Kingdom government by a company of Spanish fishermen who claimed that the United Kingdom had breached European Union law by requiring ships to have a majority of British owners if they were to be registered in the UK. The case produced a number of significant judgements on British constitutional law, and was the first time that courts held that they had power to restrain the application of an Act of Parliament pending trial and ultimately to disapply that Act when it was found to be contrary to EU law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Trade Marks Act 1994</span> Law governing trade marks

The Trade Marks Act 1994 is the law governing trade marks within the United Kingdom and the Isle of Man. It implements EU Directive No. 89/104/EEC which forms the framework for the trade mark laws of all EU member states, and replaced an earlier law, the Trade Marks Act 1938. Although the UK's trade mark regime covers the Isle of Man, it does not extend to the Channel Islands which have their own trade mark registers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supplementary protection certificate</span> Type of intellectual property right

In the European Economic Area, a supplementary protection certificate (SPC) is a sui generis intellectual property (IP) right that extends the duration of certain rights associated with a patent. It enters into force after expiry of a patent upon which it is based. This type of right is available for various regulated, biologically active agents, namely human or veterinary medicaments and plant protection products. Supplementary protection certificates were introduced to encourage innovation by compensating for the long time needed to obtain regulatory approval of these products.

A colour trade mark or color trademark is a non-conventional trade mark where at least one colour is used to perform the trade mark function of uniquely identifying the commercial origin of products or services.

The freedom of movement for workers is a policy chapter of the acquis communautaire of the European Union. The free movement of workers means that nationals of any member state of the European Union can take up an employment in another member state on the same conditions as the nationals of that particular member state. In particular, no discrimination based on nationality is allowed. It is part of the free movement of persons and one of the four economic freedoms: free movement of goods, services, labour and capital. Article 45 TFEU states that:

  1. Freedom of movement for workers shall be secured within the Community.
  2. Such freedom of movement shall entail the abolition of any discrimination based on nationality between workers of the Member States as regards employment, remuneration and other conditions of work and employment.
  3. It shall entail the right, subject to limitations justified on grounds of public policy, public security or public health:
  4. The provisions of this article shall not apply to employment in the public service.

Government procurement or public procurement is undertaken by the public authorities of the European Union (EU) and its member states in order to award contracts for public works and for the purchase of goods and services in accordance with principles derived from the Treaties of the European Union. Such procurement represents 13.6% of EU GDP as of March 2023, and has been the subject of increasing European regulation since the 1970s because of its importance to the European single market.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Equal Treatment in Goods and Services Directive 2004</span>

The Equal Treatment in Goods and Services Directive 2004 of 13 December 2004 is a directive which prohibits both direct and indirect sexual discrimination in the provision of goods and services in the European Union.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">European driving licence</span>

The European driving licence is a driving licence issued by the member states of the European Economic Area (EEA); all 27 EU member states and three EFTA member states; Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, which give shared features the various driving licence styles formerly in use. It is credit card-style with a photograph. They were introduced to replace the 110 different plastic and paper driving licences of the 300 million drivers in the EEA. The main objective of the licence is to reduce the risk of fraud.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">European Union value added tax</span> EU-wide goods and services tax policy

The European Union value-added tax is a value added tax on goods and services within the European Union (EU). The EU's institutions do not collect the tax, but EU member states are each required to adopt in national legislation a value added tax that complies with the EU VAT code. Different rates of VAT apply in different EU member states, ranging from 17% in Luxembourg to 27% in Hungary. The total VAT collected by member states is used as part of the calculation to determine what each state contributes to the EU's budget.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Quadricycle (EU vehicle classification)</span> EU vehicle category for four-wheeled microcars

The quadricycle is a European Union vehicle category for four-wheeled microcars, which allows these vehicles to be designed to less stringent requirements when compared to regular cars. Quadricycles are defined by limitations in terms of weight, engine power and speed.

Metock v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (2008) C-127/08 is a European Union law case, significant in Ireland and Denmark, on the Citizens Rights Directive and family unification rules for migrant citizens. Citizenship of the European Union was established by Article 20 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and the Citizenship Directive 2004/38 elaborates the right of Union citizens and their family members to move and reside freely in the territory of a member state, consolidating previous Directives dealing with the right to move and reside within the European Community (EC).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dangerous Preparations Directive</span>

The Dangerous Preparations Directive is a European Union directive in the field of occupational safety and health and consumer protection. It complements the Dangerous Substances Directive (67/548/EEC) and replaces a previous Dangerous Preparations Directive (88/379/EEC). The European Court of Justice had ruled in 1985 that Dangerous Substances Directive (67/548/EEC) applies only to pure substances, not preparations.

Roadworthiness or streetworthiness is a property or ability of a car, bus, truck or any kind of automobile to be in a suitable operating condition or meeting acceptable standards for safe driving and transport of people, baggage or cargo in roads or streets, being therefore street-legal.

SAS Institute Inc. v World Programming Ltd (2012) C-406/10 was a decision of the European Court of Justice which established that copyright protection does not extend to software functionality, programming languages, and file types.

<i>AAA & Anor v Minister for Justice & Ors</i> Irish Supreme Court case

AAA & Anor v Minister for Justice & Ors, [2017] IESC 80, was an Irish Supreme Court case which arose from the judgment delivered by Cooke J in the High Court on 17 May 2012, due to the fact that the applicant AAA and her children were deported to Nigeria in 2011. The court held that "as a rule" there is no right to an oral hearing in an application for leave to remain on humanitarian grounds and subsidiary protection where there has already been oral hearings in relation to an application for asylum. This decision clarified the grounds under which a claim for subsidiary protection could be heard.

In EU law, reverse discrimination occurs when the national law of a member state of the European Union provides for less favourable treatment of its citizens or domestic products than other EU citizens/goods under EU law. Since the creation of the Single Market, the right of EU citizens to move freely within the EU with their families. The right to free movement was codified in EU Directive 2004/38/EC which applies across the whole EEA. However, reverse discrimination is permitted in EU law because of the legal principle of subsidiarity, i.e. EU law is not applicable in situations purely internal to one member state. This rule of purely internal situation does not apply if the EU citizens can provide a cross-border link, e.g. by travel or by holding dual EU citizenship. EU citizens and their families have an automatic right of entry and residence in all EU countries except their own, with exceptions created by a cross-EU state border link. For example, an Irish citizen living in Germany with his family before returning to Ireland can apply for EU family rights. This is referred to as the Surinder Singh route. The cross-border dimension has been the focus of many court cases in recent years, from McCarthy to Zambrano.

References

  1. "Text in Polish of the Minister of Infrastructure's decision of 31 December 2002 on the technical requirements of road vehicles".
  2. Commission Directive 1999/7/EC of 26 January 1999 adapting to technical progress Council Directive 70/311/EEC relating to the steering equipment for motor vehicles and their trailers. No longer in force, Date of end of validity: 31/10/2014; Implicitly repealed by 32009R0661
  3. "Polish court decision".
  4. "Polish web news portal report". 8 February 2010.
  5. "European Commission – press release 30.09.20010".
  6. "European Commission – press release −29.09.2011".
  7. "Decision (in Polish) allowing Lithuania to intervene C 639/11".
  8. "Opinion (in Polish) of the Advocate General".
  9. "Polish web business portal report".
  10. "Polish local TV station interview with Grzegorz Dorobek". 8 November 2013.
  11. "Judgement of the European Court of Justice".
  12. "Video of Judgement of the European Court of Justice being delivered".
  13. "Verdict of the Polish Supreme Administration Court".
  14. "Commission's answer to a written question from Theresa Griffin MEP".
  15. "Commission's answer to a written question from Theresa Griffin MEP".
  16. "Polish ministerial order on roadworthyness testing of right hand drive vehicles" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 December 2015. Retrieved 16 December 2015.
  17. "Polish ministerial order allowing registration of right hand drive vehicles" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 December 2015. Retrieved 16 December 2015.