EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Opinion of Mr Advocate General Tesauro delivered on 30 April 1991. # Criminal proceedings against Mario Nijs and Transport Vanschoonbeek-Matterne NV. # Reference for a preliminary ruling: Politierechtbank Hasselt - Belgium. # Road transport - Social legislation - Inspections. # Case C-158/90.

ECLI:EU:C:1991:179

61990CC0158

April 30, 1991
With Google you find a lot.
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

Important legal notice

61990C0158

European Court reports 1991 Page I-06035

Opinion of the Advocate-General

++++

Mr President,

Members of the Court,

More specifically, the national court asks whether the expression "last day" means the last calendar day, the last working day or the last driving day, and also whether "previous week" means the one immediately before the inspection or the previous week in which the driver drove a vehicle subject to Community rules.

2. While some language versions of the provision, such as, for example, the Dutch (the text to which the national court is referring) and the Italian, may at first sight give rise to some perplexity, I do not think, bearing in mind the general scheme and purpose of the rules in question, that the provision gives rise to serious problems of interpretation.

As regards the legal context, it should be remembered that Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 of 20 December 1985 on the harmonization of certain social legislation relating to road transport lays down certain rules on rest and driving periods for drivers. Regulation No 3821/85, adopted the same day, provides in Article 3(1) for the use of recording equipment in all vehicles subject to Community rules. The record sheets for insertion in this equipment are designed to record, automatically or semi-automatically, data on the running of the vehicles and the working periods of the drivers, so as to allow the competent authorities to monitor compliance with the driving and rest periods prescribed by Regulation No 3820/85.

Article 14 of Regulation No 3821/85 requires the employer to issue record sheets to the driver, who must then use them every day he drives (Article 15(2)), entering certain compulsory information such as his name, the date and the registration number of the vehicle (Article 15(5)).

Such an interpretation, moreover, is consistent with the purpose of the provision, which is precisely to allow monitoring of compliance with the provisions on driving and rest periods.

It is clear, furthermore, that, to check whether the record sheet produced really is the sheet for the last driving day, recourse can be had if necessary to other means of inspection, such as examination of the firm's accounts.

4. The same considerations apply to the concept of the "previous week", which must be understood as the last week before the inspection in which the driver drove a vehicle subject to Community rules.

Article 15(7) of Council Regulation No 3821/85 is to be interpreted as meaning that the driver must produce the record sheet for the last driving day of the week preceding the inspection in which that driver drove a vehicle subject to Community rules.

(*) Original language: Italian.

(1) - OJ 1985 L 370, p. 8.

(2) - These versions refer to the last day of the previous week in which he drove, whereas the French and English versions refer more specifically to the last day of the previous week on which he drove.

(3) - For the principle according to which the different language versions of a Community text must be given a uniform interpretation and hence, in the case of divergence, the provision must be interpreted by reference to the general scheme and purposes of the rules of which it forms a part, see the judgments in Case 30/77 Bouchereau [1977] ECR 1999, at paragraph 14, and in Case 9/79 Koschniske v Raad van Arbeid [1979] ECR 2717, at paragraphs 5 to 8.

(4) - OJ 1985 L 370, p. 1.

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia