C-11/77

LE MINISTRE DES AFFAIRES CULTURELLES (Minister for Cultural Affairs)

on the interpretation of Articles 52 to 54 of the EEC Treaty,

THE COURT

composed of: H. Kutscher, President, A. M. Donner and P. Pescatore, Presidents of Chambers, J. Mertens de Wilmars, M. Sørensen, Lord Mackenzie Stuart, A. O'Keeffe, G. Bosco and A. Touffait, Judges,

Advocate-General: H. Mayras Registrar: A. Van Houtte

gives the following

diplomatic conventions and to pro­ nistratif Paris. According to the defence duction of a certificate equivalent to the lodged with the Tribunal Administratif certificate required for French architects. on 16 January 1974 by the Minister for ... Foreigners not covered by the Cultural Affairs, the rejection of the provisions of a convention may, application on the ground of want of exceptionally, receive the said reciprocity was based on the fact that authorization'. there was no specific diplomatic convention relating to conditions of The Law adds that foreign architects who reciprocity between France and the have been thus authorized shall not be United Kingdom and that, moreover, the members of the Order of Architects but relevant provision of the Treaty of Rome shall nevertheless be subject to its was not Article 7 but Articles 52 to 58 on discipline. freedom of establishment. The defence contended that those provisions could A decree of the Minister for Cultural not be regarded as sufficient legal Affairs dated 22 June 1964 recognized justification because they made the the certificates issued in the United attainment of freedom of establishment

Kingdom by the Architectural Associ­ subject to the issue of directives by the ation as an equivalent qualification Council which, as far as the free within the meaning of the aforesaid Law establishment of architects was although there is no reciprocal concerned, had not yet been adopted. convention between the United Kingdom and France relating to the 3. The Tribunal Administratif, Paris, practice of the profession of architect. held that the settlement of the dispute raised questions of interpretation of 2. Richard Patrick, a British subject, Community law, and, by order of 3 who has held the certificate of the January 1977, asked the Court of Justice

The order making the reference was Meanwhile the legal position has become entered at the Court Registry on 25 clear: the nationals of another Member January 1977. After hearing the report of State derive from the Treaty itself, that is the Judge-Rapporteur and the views of to say from Article 52 thereof, the right the Advocate General, the Court decided to pursue activities as self-employed to proceed without any preparatory persons under the same conditions as inquiry. nationals. A provision laying down that a special and individual authorization shall The Commission and the French be required only from foreigners before Government submitted written obser­ they can practise the profession of vations. architect is a manifest restriction which cannot be invoked against a person who is entitled to freedom of establishment II — Oberservations submitted Since the judgment in the Reyners case under Article 20 of the the requirement that a convention of Protocol on the Statute of reciprocity should have been concluded the Court of Justice of the between France and, in the case of a EEC national of another Member State, the applicant's country of origin has been A — Observations of the French obsolete and irrelevant Accordingly, in Government order to establish the conditions on which a Community citizen is entitled to The French Government points out that free establishment, it is enough to the contested decision preceded the ascertain the conditions which a French judgment of 21 June 1974 in Case 2/74 national must satisfy in order to have the Reyners v Belgium, [1974] ECR 631. It right to practise the profession of adds that it is prepared to act in this case, architect, including membership of the and in all cases of the same kind, in Order of Architects. Apart from the fact accordance with the judgment and in that he must not have lost the enjoyment particular in accordance with paragraph 1 of his civil rights, the essential condition of the operative part of the judgment in is that he possesses an architectural which the Court ruled that 'since the end qualification. of the transitional period Article 52 of the Treaty is a directly applicable In the present case, in contrast to Case provision, despite the absence, in a 71/76, Thieffry, foreign qualifications are particular sphere, of the directives recognized by law as equivalent for the prescribed by Articles 54 (2) and 57 (1) of specific purpose of enabling those the Treaty'. holding such qualifications to enter the profession of architect in France. B — Observations of the Commission Provided that the national of another Member State proves that he holds a The Commission states that the con­ qualification which is officially recog­ tentions of the parties before the national nized in this way he no longer has to court rested on an out-of-date legal comply with the requirement of special

2 This question was submitted in connexion with a dispute between the French Minister for Cultural Affairs and a British subject who possessed an architect's certificate issued in the United Kingdom by the Architectural Association and who, early in 1973, applied for authorization to practise as an architect in France.

3 Under the first subparagraph of Article 2 (2) of the French Law of 31 December 1940 establishing the Order of Architects and governing the title and profession of architect, 'Nationals of foreign countries shall be authorized to practise the profession of architect in France subject to the conditions of reciprocity laid down by diplomatic conventions and to production of a certificate equivalent to the certificate required for French architects'.

JUDGMENT OF 28. 6. 1977 — CASE 11/77

4 Under the third subparagraph of Article 2 (2), 'Foreigners not covered by provisions of a convention may, exceptionally, receive the said authorization'.

5 Under a Ministerial decree of 22 June 1964, adopted in implementation of this provision, holders of certificates issued by the aforesaid Architectural Association were considered to fulfil the conditions concerning equivalent qualifications laid down in the above-mentioned Article 2 (2).

6 By decision of 9 August 1973 the applicant was refused the authorization requested on the ground that, under the provisions of the Law of 31 December 1940, such authorization continued to be exceptional in cases where there was no convention of reciprocity between France and the applicant's country of origin and that, in the absence of a specific convention for this purpose between Member States of the EEC and, in particular, between France and the United Kingdom, the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community could not be a substitute for such a convention because Articles 52 to 58 concerning freedom of establishment referred, for the attainment of this freedom, to directives of the Council which had not yet been issued.

11 The fact that this progression has not been adhered to leaves the obligation itself intact beyond the end of the period provided for its fulfilment.

12 It is not possible to invoke against the direct effect of the rule on equal treatment with nationals contained in Article 52 the fact that the Council has

failed to issue the directives provided for by Articles 54 and 57 or the fact that certain of the directives actually issued have not fully attained the objectives of non-discrimination required by Article 52.

13 After the expiry of the transitional period the directives provided for by the chapter on the right of establishment have become superfluous with regard to implementing the rule on nationality, since this is henceforth sanctioned by the Treaty itself with direct effect.

14 In the absence of transitional provisions concerning the right of establishment in the Treaty of Accession of 22 January 1972, the principle contained in Article 52 has, in the case of the new Member States and their nationals, been fully effective since the entry into force of the said Treaty, that is, since 1 January 1973.

15 Thus a Member State cannot, after 1 January 1973, make the exercise of the right to free establishment by a national of a new Member State subject to an exceptionel authorization in so far as he fulfils the conditions laid down by the legislation of the country of establishment for its own nationals.

19 The costs incurred by the French Government and the Commission of the European Communities, which have submitted observations to the Court, are not recoverable.

20 Since these proceedings are, in so far as the parties to the main action are concerned, a step in the action pending before the national court, costs are a matter for that court.

On those grounds,

THE COURT,

in answer to the question referred to it by the Tribunal Administratif, Paris, by order of 3 January 1977 hereby rules:

With effect from 1 January 1973, a national of a new Member State who holds a qualification recognized by the competent authorities of the Member State of establishment as equivalent to the certificate issued and required in that State enjoys the right to be admitted to the profession of architect and to practise it

Registrar President

OPINION OF MR ADVOCATE-GENERAL MAYRAS

DELIVERED ON 8 JUNE 1977 1

Mr President, member of various partnerships and, Members of the Court, during the period 1968 to 1970, was official architect to the County of A decision on this reference to the Court Hampshire for its school building for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal programme. Administratif, Paris, is, in my view, governed by the interpretation which the In April 1973, he ceased work in Britain, Court placed on Article 52 of the Treaty and settled in France, where he estab­ of Rome in its judgment of 21 June 1974 lished his residence at St in Reyners v Belgian State (Case 2/74 Germain-en-Laye. [1974] ECR 631) and reaffirmed, quite recently, in the Court's judgment of 28 The plaintiff in the main action April 1977 in Thieffry v Conseil de forthwith applied to the competent l'Ordre des Avocats (Case 71/76). French authority for permission to practise his profession on French The facts are really quite straightforward. territory. Mr Richard H. Patrick, a British subject, has, since 1961, held an architect's To this end he invoked the provisions of certificate issued by the Architectural the Law of 31 December 1940 governing Association, London. He has worked as a the tide and the exercise of the professional architect in the United profession of architect, Article 2 (2) Kingdom on his own account or as a of which provides that, on the

1 — Translated from the French.