From the Brussels office

Commission names and shames

On 9 December the European Commission published a scoreboard presenting an overview of the implementation into national law of Directive 2005/36 on the recognition of professional qualifications. The deadline for implementation was 20 October 2007 and to date five member states are yet to transpose the provisions fully: Austria, Belgium, France, Greece and Luxembourg. The Court of Justice has already found these member states to be in breach of their obligations by their failure to implement the directive on time. The Commission has also published a “user’s guide” to the directive in a question-and-answer format.

Ruling on free movement of legal trainees

On 10 December the Court of Justice handed down its judgment in Krzystof Pesla v Justizministerium Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (C-345/08). The case raises questions about the free movement of a European citizen seeking to carry out his legal traineeship in a member state other than that in which he obtained his degree.

Mr Pesla, a Polish national, had taken proceedings against the German Ministry of Justice challenging its finding that his qualifications could not be deemed equivalent to those necessarily undertaken by German students prior to commencing a traineeship. The court held that, whereas Community law does require that the experience and qualifications of a candidate with a diploma in law from another member state should be fully taken into account, it does not require that the level of knowledge of national law required be lowered for such a candidate.

EU-wide patent comes closer

The creation of a coherent EU-wide system of patents moved one step closer to fruition on 4 December. Ministers meeting in the Competitiveness Council agreed on a proposed regulation that would establish a single patent valid throughout the EU. They also adopted conclusions on the creation of a European patents court system that would have exclusive jurisdiction over litigation concerning both the validity and infringements of such patents.

Language and the need for translation has been the perpetual stumbling block for this proposal. Ministers avoided the matter by concluding that a separate regulation would set down the translation arrangements. While the details will require further negotiation between governments, other considerations will affect the timescale of adoption. The Court of Justice has been asked to give its opinion on the legality of establishing the new court system and consequential amendments will have to be made to the European Patent Convention before the EU patent becomes operational.

Consumer rights and dynamic travel packages

At the meeting of the Competitiveness Council on 3 and 4 December, ministers reached broad agreement on the proposal for a Consumer Rights Directive. Following a public debate, the majority of delegations were in agreement that financial services and immoveable property should be excluded from the scope of the directive and many supported the Commission’s choice to pursue maximum harmonisation in this area. At a conference held in Brussels on 8 December, Andreas Schwab MEP, rapporteur in the European Parliament for the proposal, stressed that the directive should not be rushed and that he did not expect a first reading in Parliament until November 2010 at the earliest.

On 26 November the Commission launched a consultation seeking stakeholder views on how the related Package Travel Directive should be revised to take account of changes to the market since it was introduced in 1990. The consultation highlights the growth of the internet and low-cost airlines and will close on 7 February 2010. The Commission intends to bring forward proposals to amend the directive in autumn 2010. A study on the Package Travel Directive was published on the same day.

European private company stalls

The Competitiveness Council failed to reach agreement on the proposed Regulation on the Statute for a European private company (SPE). A Swedish Presidency compromise text was published on 27 November. It had been hoped this would resolve the outstanding issues as to the seat of an SPE and the question of employee participation in its management. As regards employee participation, the Presidency proposed clarifying that the rules are not applicable to companies established under national law. In relation to an SPE’s seat, a transition period of two years for an SPE to move its registered office and principal place of administration to the same member state was suggested.

It has been reported that the strongest objections raised in Council were from Austria, which wants SPEs to have to register in the member state where they have their central administration, whilst Spain and the Netherlands argue for a longer transition period. Negotiations on the proposal will continue. Similar to the European company in concept, the SPE would allow a business to operate under a single legal form throughout the EU.