C-310/90

Mr President, 'Must Article 4(1 )(a) of Directive Members of the Court, 85/384/EEC be interpreted in such a way that education and training which lasts for four years and which includes integrated practical semesters supervised by the Hoch- schule may be regarded as four years of 1. Mr Egle is of German nationality and full-time studies?" lives in Belgium. He holds a diploma awarded by the Constance Fachhochschule obtained in 1981 on completion of four years' study which included two semesters of practical experience ('Praxissemester'), and has applied for registration with the Architects' Association of the Province of 3. Let us first consider the context of the Limbourg (Belgium), relying on Council directive. Its adoption represents the Directive 85/384/EEC of 10 June 1985 on outcome of very lengthy negotiations, some the mutual recognition of diplomas, 18 years having been necessary for its certificates and other evidence of formal preparation. Unlike the directives covering, qualifications in architecture, including for example, the medical or paramedical measures to facilitate the effective exercise professions, there are no provisions of the right of establishment and freedom to harmonizing training for architects or access provide services ('the directive'). ' to the exercise or their profession. The directive does not include a list of the quali- fications which Member States must recognize, but requires mutual recognition of the diplomas, certificates and other evidence of formal qualifications which 2. The Architects' Association of the meet the conditions laid down in Articles 3 Province of Limbourg rejected his and 4. In that regard Article 3 provides that application principally on the ground that training in architecture must be provided his diploma did not fulfil the conditions laid through courses of studies at university level down in the directive. The National Council concerned principally with architecture, and of the Architects' Association, to which he that the studies must be balanced between appealed, took the view that his training the theoretical and practical aspects of should be regarded as satisfying those architectural training and ensure the conditions and therefore ordered his name acquisition of the various abilities, to be entered on the register of the Asso- knowledge, and skills listed in the directive ciation. An appeal was lodged against that (which names U areas which must be decision before the Belgian Cour de covered by the training). To those Cassation, which has referred the following requirements concerning the content of the question to the Court of Justice for a training, Article 4 of the directive adds preliminary ruling: conditions regarding its duration. Article 4(1) (first subparagraph) (a) requires the * Original language: French. total length of the training to be a minimum I — OJ 1995 L 223, p. 15.

of either four years of full-time studies at a Training in the Field of Architecture within university or comparable educational estab- three months of communication. That lishment or at least six yean of study at a Committee must deliver an opinion on the university or comparable educational estab- matter within three months and on the lishment of which at least three must be expiry of a fresh period of three months full-time. By way of exception to that thereafter or on the expiry of the deadline provision, the second subparagraph of the for delivery thereof the diploma, certificate same arude provides that the training given or other evidence of formal qualifications over three years in the Fachhochschulen in must be published unless the Member State the Federal Republic of Germany satisfies which awards it amends the communication the requirements of the directive if it is or the matter is brought before the Court supplemented by a four-year period of of Justice by a Member State or the professional experience in that country. Commission under Articles 169 and 170 of

must communicate as soon as possible — the initial communication having to be made within 12 months of notification of the directive — the list of diplomas, 5. Lastly, the directive includes provision certificates and other evidence of formal for established rights. Article 10 states that qualifications which meet the criteria laid Member Sutes shall recognize the qualifi- down in Articles 3 and 4, together with the cations listed in Article 11 which are held by establishments and authorities awarding nationals of the Member Sutes who already

I-192

NATIONALE RAAD VAN DE ORDE VAN ARCHITECTEN v EGLE

9. The Commission published the list communicated by Germany with the following remark: These diplomas are to be 7. That is the case in the Constance Fach- recognized under the conditions provided hochschule. Communication of the list led a for in Article 4(1) of Directive 85/384/EEC Member Sute to refer to the Advisory either under the first indent or the second Committee on Education and Training in indent depending on the duration of the the Field of Architecture for an opinion training to which they relate'.2 In its obser- regarding the four-year training course vations the Commission points out that it given by the Fachhochschule which included had not intended to follow the opinion of two practical semesters. The opinion issued the Advisory Committee, merely referring to by the Committee was to the effect that the duration of the training in order to such courses could not be regarded as distinguish between qualifications covered covered by the first subparagraph of Article by the first or the second subparagraph of 4(1) but fell under the exception contained Article 4 respectively, without mentioning in the second subparagraph. Consequently, whether studies comprised a practical a qualification obtained on completion of semester or not. such a course could be recognized ony if the course was supplemented by four years' professional experience.

In that not amend the communication to the effect regard, by the way, the Commission appears that four year courses, including those given to entertain some doubt as to whether the by the Constance Fachhochschule, met the directive has been adequately transposed. I requirements of the directive and must be note that in any event the view that recog- recognized by the other Member States on nition of diplomas which satisfy the the basis of Article 4(1), first subparagraph, requirements of the directive, regardless of of the directive — that is to say, without the existence of measures transposing it into the additional requirement of four years' national law, may be obtained exclusively professional experience. The German on the basis of the directive has not been Government argued that practical semesters challenged by the Council of the Architects' formed an integral part of the training, the Association. content of which was determined by laws and regulations adopted by the public auth- 2 — OJ 1988 C 270, p. 3, ind OJ 1989 C 205, p. 51.

12. It seems to me to be important in the first case to point out that the directive provides expressis verbis that training must be balanced between the theoretical and practical aspects. Thus there can be no doubt that the directive permits training to include a practical element and one might 15. I agree with the Commission that it is even consider such an element necessary necessary in that context for practical in order for a course to satisfy the semesters to be integrated in courses in the requirements of the directive. same way as the theoretical component and for them to be organized, supervised and assessed by the educational establishment. In other words, the student must not be placed in a position where he bears professional 13. However, are those requirements responsibility, even under tutelage, so to satisfied if two semesters are essentially speak, but he must be in a position enabling devoted to practical study? The first him to acquire knowledge and skills. Two objection that may be made in that regard characteristics of the qualification at issue may be disposed of without difficulty, I appear to me capable of satisfying those think. The requirement that studies be criteria. In the first place, the practical full-time, laid down in Article 4 of the studies are closely supervised by the Hoch- directive, may be fulfilled as well by schule, which chooses the firm of architects, practical study as by theoretical study. The determines whether the course content has condition says nothing as to the content of been observed, requires a written report, the studies, but refers to the commitment of ensures that the matter is supervised by a the student's time it requires. The concept university lecturer and requires if necessary of full-time studies is therefore contrasted that all or part of an unsatisfactory semester not with that of practical study, but with be repeated. Secondly, the integration in the that of part-rime study. course of study of such semesters appears to be guaranteed inasmuch as they alternate with theoretical ones, and the training cannot end with a practical semester. In other words, the student is encouraged not 14. Somewhat more delicate, by contrast, is to start using theoretical knowledge already the question of what criteria may be applied acquired, but to coordinate academic to enable practical studies to be distin- learning with practical learning.

17. The Commission and the German Government have also pointed out that Mr Egle is in fact entitled to rely on Articles 10 and 11 of the directive regarding established 20. In that regard, the Commission rights, rather than the provisions of Articles emphasizes that its communication 3 and 4, since his diploma was awarded in including training of the kind at issue in the 1981. main proceedings applies only to qualifi- cations awarded to those who commenced their studies during the 1988/89 academic year. Consequendy, it concludes, one cannot consider that that communication may be relied on in order to establish that a qualification delivered in 1981 meets the 18. It is obviously not for this Court to qualitative requirements laid down in Article determine whether Mr Egle's qualification 3 of the directive. must be recognized or, a fortiori, to decide under what provision of the directive it must be recognized. In fact the Belgian court points out expressly that Mr Egle is not relying on the principle of established rights to obtain recognition. However, I would point out that a qualification delivered by a 21. For my part, I consider that in any Fachhochschule after four years' training event Mr Egle is fully entitled to seek to which includes two practical semesters must show that his qualification meets those be recognized pursuant to Article 11 of the criteria. Nevertheless, it must be admitted

I-195

OPINION OF MR DARMON —CASE C-310/90

that recognition of the diploma under the is because in the latter case it is only general scheme may prove to be more necessary to establish that the qualification difficult than it would be on the basis of the is included in the list contained in Article 11 provisions regarding established rights: that of the directive.