- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-703/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 16 November 2022 — WU v Directie van het Centraal Bureau Rijvaardigheidsbewijzen (CBR)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62022CN0703
62022CN0703
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
30.5.2023
Official Journal of the European Union
C 189/4
(Case C-703/22)
(2023/C 189/05)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Appellant: WU
Respondent: Directie van het Centraal Bureau Rijvaardigheidsbewijzen (CBR)
Questions referred
1.Should point 6.4 of Annex III to Directive 2006/126/EC, (1) more specifically the standard of a horizontal field of vision of both eyes of at least 160° , read in the light of the principle of proportionality, be interpreted as meaning that a person who does not meet this standard from a medical point of view, but who, according to different medical experts, is actually fit to drive a lorry, can nevertheless meet the standard?
2.If the answer to that question is in the negative, can a proportionality assessment be carried out within the framework of the Driving Licence Directive in an individual case, even if the criterion laid down in point 6.4 of Annex III to Directive 2006/126/EC does not provide any scope for exemption in such cases?
3.If so, what are the circumstances that may play a role in assessing whether there may be derogation from the standard for the field of vision in a specific case, provided for in point 6.4 of Annex III to Directive 2006/126/EC?
(1) OJ 2006 L 403, p. 18 (also ‘the Driving Licence Directive’).
* * *
Language of the case: Dutch