delivered on 7 September 2017 (1)

Case C‑314/16

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive 2006/126/EC — Transport — Driving licences — Scope of the definitions of categories C1 and C and the restriction on the definition of category D1)

By its action, the European Commission asks the Court to declare that:

–by failing to comply with the obligation to ensure that the definition of categories C1 and C covers only motor vehicles other than those in categories D1 or D, the Czech Republic failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(1) and Article 4(4)(d) and (f) of Directive 2006/126/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on driving licences, (2) and

–by restricting the definition of category D1 to motor vehicles designed and constructed for the carriage of more than eight passengers, the Czech Republic failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(1) and Article 4(4)(h) of that directive.

In this Opinion, I will set out the reasons why, in my view, this action for failure to fulfil obligations is well founded.

Recitals 1, 2 and 12 of Directive 2006/126 state:

(1)Council Directive 91/439/EEC of 29 July 1991 on driving licences (3) has been significantly amended on several occasions. Now that new amendments are being made to the said Directive, it is desirable, for reasons of clarity, that the provisions in question should be recast.

(2)The rules on driving licences are essential elements of the common transport policy, contribute to improving road safety, and facilitate the free movement of persons taking up residence in a Member State other than the one issuing the licence. Given the importance of individual means of transport, possession of a driving licence duly recognised by a host Member State promotes free movement and freedom of establishment of persons. Despite the progress achieved with harmonising the rules on driving licences, significant differences have persisted between Member States … on subcategories of vehicles, which needed to be harmonised more fully, in order to contribute to the implementation of Community policies.

…

(12)The definitions of the categories should reflect to a greater extent the technical characteristics of the vehicles concerned and the skills needed to drive a vehicle.’

Paragraph 1 of Article 1 of that directive, entitled ‘Model licence’, provides:

1.‘1. Member States shall introduce a national driving licence based on the Community model set out in Annex I, in accordance with the provisions of this Directive. The emblem on page 1 of the Community model driving licences shall contain the distinguishing sign of the Member State issuing the licence.’

Paragraphs 1 and 4 of Article 4 of the directive, entitled ‘Categories, definitions and minimum ages’, states:

1.‘1. The driving licence provided for in Article 1 shall authorise the driving of power-driven vehicles in the categories defined hereafter. It may be issued from the minimum age indicated for each category. A “power-driven vehicle” means any self-propelled vehicle running on a road under its own power, other than a rail-borne vehicle.

…

4.motor vehicles:

–“motor vehicle” means any power-driven vehicle, which is normally used for carrying persons or goods by road or for drawing, on the road, vehicles used for the carriage of persons or goods. This term shall include trolleybuses, i.e. vehicles connected to an electric conductor and not rail-borne. It shall not include agricultural or forestry tractors,

…

(d)Category C1: motor vehicles other than those in categories D1 or D, the maximum authorised mass of which exceeds 3500 kg, but does not exceed 7500 kg, and which are designed and constructed for the carriage of no more than eight passengers in addition to the driver; motor vehicles in this category may be combined with a trailer having a maximum authorised mass not exceeding 750 kg;

…

(f)Category C: motor vehicles other than those in categories D1 or D, whose maximum authorised mass is over 3500 kg and which are designed and constructed for the carriage of no more than eight passengers in addition to the driver; motor vehicles in this category may be combined with a trailer having a maximum authorised mass which does not exceed 750 kg;

…

(h)Category D1: motor vehicles designed and constructed for the carriage of no more than 16 passengers in addition to the driver and with a maximum length not exceeding 8 m; motor vehicles in this category may be combined with a trailer having a maximum authorised mass not exceeding 750 kg;

…

(j)Category D: motor vehicles designed and constructed for the carriage of more than eight passengers in addition to the driver; motor vehicles which may be driven with a category D licence may be combined with a trailer having a maximum authorised mass which does not exceed 750 kg;

…’

Under the heading ‘Issue, validity and renewal’, Article 7(1)(a) of Directive 2006/126 provides:

1.Driving licences shall be issued only to those applicants:

(a)who have passed a test of skills and behaviour and a theoretical test and who meet medical standards, in accordance with the provisions of Annexes II and III.’

Article 16 of the directive, entitled ‘Transposition’, states:

1.Member States shall adopt and publish, not later than 19 January 2011, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Article 1(1), Article 3, Article 4(1), (2), (3) and (4)(b) to (k), …. They shall forthwith communicate to the Commission the text of those provisions.

2.They shall apply those provisions as from 19 January 2013.

…

Article 80a(1)(g), (h) and (i) of the Zákon č. 361/2000 Sb. o provozu na pozemních komunikacích a o změnách některých zákonů (Law No 361/2000 on road transit and amending certain laws), as last amended, (4) provides as follows:

(1)‘(1) Category

…

(g)C1 covers motor vehicles, other than tractors, the maximum authorised mass of which exceeds 3500 kg but does not exceed 7500 kg, which are designed for the carriage of no more than eight persons, in addition to the driver, and to which a trailer may be attached having a maximum authorised mass not exceeding 750 kg;

(h)C covers motor vehicles, other than tractors and the vehicles referred to in point (g), the maximum authorised mass of which exceeds 3500 kg, which are designed for the carriage of no more than eight persons, in addition to the driver, and to which a trailer may be attached having a maximum authorised mass not exceeding 750 kg;

(i)D1 covers motor vehicles with a maximum length not exceeding 8 m which are designed for the carriage of 8 to 16 persons, in addition to the driver, and to which a trailer may be attached having a maximum authorised mass not exceeding 750 kg.’

II. Pre-litigation procedure

By letter of 11 July 2014, the Commission sent the Czech Republic a letter of formal notice drawing the latter’s attention to the fact that some provisions of its domestic legislation, particularly those concerning the definition of driving licence categories C1, C and D1, were not in accordance with Directive 2006/126.

After considering the arguments put forward by the Czech Republic, set out in its reply of 8 October 2014, the Commission issued a reasoned opinion on 27 February 2015. It also called upon the Czech Republic to take the measures necessary to comply with the reasoned opinion within two months of the date of its receipt. At the request of the Czech Republic, that deadline was extended to 27 May 2015.

By letter of 22 May 2015, the Czech Republic replied to the reasoned opinion stating that, with respect to the definition of vehicle categories C, C1 and D1, ‘in order to avoid potential ambiguities and to ensure greater legal certainty, the Czech Republic agrees to amend in part the legal provisions in force which ought to meet the Commission’s requirements’.

Since no notification of the possible adoption of the planned amendments was forthcoming and taking the view that, in any event, the failures complained of continued to exist when the deadline set in the reasoned opinion expired, the Commission brought the present action before the Court.

III. Arguments of the parties

In support of its action, the Commission puts forward two pleas in law.

By its first plea, the Commission argues that Article 4(4) of Directive 2006/126 specifically draws a distinction between the definitions of vehicle categories C1 and C and those of categories D1 and D, and that Czech law does not reflect that distinction, worded as follows: ‘motor vehicles other than those in categories D1 or D’. The result of that omission is that, in the Czech Republic, the holder of a category C1 or C driving licence is entitled to drive a vehicle constructed for the carriage of no more than eight passengers, irrespective of the fact that it was designed for the carriage of passengers or goods, while the directive requires a category D1 or D driving licence if the vehicle is designed and constructed for the carriage of passengers.

The Commission illustrates the consequences of such an omission with the example of luxury minibuses or private armoured vehicles designed for the carriage of passengers. On the basis of their technical characteristics (able to carry no more than eight passengers, mass exceeding 3500 kg and no longer than 8 metres), they could be driven by the holder of a category C1 licence, even though a category D1 licence should be required for the carriage of persons.

By its second plea, the Commission asserts that, while Article 4(4)(h) of Directive 2006/126 defines category D1 as covering motor vehicles ‘designed and constructed for the carriage of no more than 16 passengers in addition to the driver’, Czech law, by imposing a minimum of eight passengers, introduced a further requirement, contrary to Article 4(4)(h) of the directive.

In support of its two pleas, the Commission states that, typically, category C covers motor vehicles intended for the carriage of goods while category D covers motor vehicles intended for the carriage of passengers. However, that does not preclude category C motor vehicles from also being used for the carriage of passengers. Those cases will primarily involve carriage of the team responsible for handling the vehicle load.

Since some of the technical characteristics of categories C and C1 are the same as those of categories D1 and D, the Commission draws attention to the need to reserve the latter categories for vehicles designed for the carriage of persons.

The Commission relies on the legislative history of the EU rules on driving licences. It contends that:

–Article 3(1) of First Council Directive 80/1263/EEC (5) on the introduction of a Community driving licence drew a distinction between categories C and D depending on whether the motor vehicles were used for the carriage of goods (category C) or the carriage of passengers (category D), where the latter category was also defined by reference to the number of permitted passengers, which had to be eight or more;

–Article 3(1) and (2) of Directive 91/439/EEC (6)

on driving licences subsequently introduced the division into subcategories C and C1 as well as D and D1. The distinction between motor vehicles based on their purpose (carriage of passengers or goods) was no longer ‘as clear’ (7) because the definition of categories C and C1 no longer mentioned the carriage of goods. However, categories C and D were defined in that directive as being mutually exclusive. In addition, the subcategories bearing the number 1 generally referred to smaller vehicles.

The Commission also mentions the fact that Directive 2006/126 slightly altered the definition of the categories. In that directive, the EU legislature inserted reference to the maximum authorised number of passengers who may be carried in category C and C1 motor vehicles, corresponding to the number of team members likely to be carried mainly for the purposes of handling the load. The words ‘carriage of goods’ do not appear in the provisions defining the C categories. However, it is apparent from Annex II, entitled ‘Minimum requirements for driving tests’, that vehicles in the C categories are primarily intended for the carriage of goods and vehicles in the D categories for the carriage of passengers. Furthermore, Directive 2006/126 removed the minimum limit of eight passengers for category D1 motor vehicles. Accordingly, that category is only defined by the maximum number of passengers, which may not exceed 16, and by the maximum length of the vehicle, set at 8 metres.

21.The Czech Republic argues that the Commission’s application is ill founded and asks the Court to dismiss it. It contends that its chosen method resulted in an appropriate and understandable transposition of the provisions at issue, thereby ensuring the objective pursued by Directive 2006/126.

22.The Czech Republic claims that, under EU law, it was not required to transpose the provisions of the directive word for word and was free to choose to clarify the objective criteria distinguishing between the different vehicle categories, provided that that choice achieved the desired outcome.

23.It also submits that the EU legislature defined the vehicle categories in Article 4(4) of Directive 2006/126 by reference to overlapping technical characteristics, without mentioning the carriage of goods and persons, while leaving it to Member States to distinguish between those categories, as indicated by the phrase ‘motor vehicles other than those in categories D1 or D’. The Czech Republic therefore drew up a definition, at national level, of vehicle categories C1, C and D1 which was precise, understandable and, in practice, unlikely to give rise to dispute, fulfilling the objective set by EU law to distinguish between vehicle categories based on the purpose of the transport. (8) It thus justifies its decision to differentiate category D1 by reference to the number of passengers who may be carried (more than eight).

24.The Czech Republic states that the wide range of distinctive criteria, such as the mass of the vehicle (categories C and C1), its length (category D1) or the maximum or minimum number of persons carried (C, C1, D and D1), results in overlaps which generate misunderstanding and confusion since a single vehicle may fall within several categories.

25.It also submits that, in the absence of any distinction, the D1 motor vehicle category (motor vehicles with a maximum length of 8 metres able to carry no more than 16 passengers) would be absorbed de facto by categories C1 and C. It could also be inferred that the driving of a lorry under 8 metres in length would require a category D1 driving licence and that a C1 driving licence would be required only if the lorry’s length were to exceed 8 metres.

26.In its rejoinder, the Czech Republic argues that the reasons given by the Commission, to the effect that category C vehicles are ‘primarily intended for the carriage of goods’ and that category D vehicles are ‘primarily intended for the carriage of passengers’, (9) are fundamentally vague and of contentious practical application. According to the Czech Republic, the word ‘primarily’ leaves open the possibility of departing from the rule, all the more so because the strict classification of vehicles under one or other of those criteria is not always feasible and, furthermore, there may be changes in the primary use of vehicles over time.

27.The Czech Republic also disagrees with the Commission’s contention that the transposition into Czech law has led to an unacceptable restriction on the definition of the D1 vehicle category. It claims that the Commission is wrong to assert that luxury minibuses or private armoured vehicles, able to carry no more than eight passengers in addition to the driver, fall within the D1 vehicle category under Directive 2006/126.

28.According to the Czech Republic, the D1 vehicle category is a subset of the D vehicle category, as is apparent from its name and the legislative history of the definition of vehicle categories at EU level. It is an ‘abridged’ version of category D and, as such, covers a specific section of category D vehicles which, in the light of their characteristics, require only an abridged version of the category D driving licence. Since the threshold relating to the number of persons who may be carried appears in the definition of category D, (10) it must be reproduced in Category D1. Below that, the vehicles could fall only under category C, or possibly category C1.

29.The matter at issue concerns the content of the provisions of Directive 2006/126 defining two main vehicle categories (C and D) and their subcategories (C1 and D1) as well as, in essence, their purpose, which is not expressly stated in Article 4(4)(d), (f), (h) and (j) of that directive, namely to distinguish between vehicles intended for the carriage of persons and other vehicles.

30.Like the Commission, I consider it necessary to set out the meaning and scope of the exclusion of categories D and D1, as the first distinctive criterion of categories C and C1, putting it in context (11) and recalling the objectives pursued by the rules of which it is part. (12)

31.The provisions of Directive 2006/126 are the result of the recasting of Directive 91/439, justified by the amendments made to the latter on several occasions.

32.That directive repealed Directive 80/1263, which made provision for the creation of a Community driving licence for the purpose of ensuring the mutual recognition by Member States of national driving licences as well as the exchange of licences by holders transferring their usual place of residence or employment from one Member State to another.

33.In Directive 80/126, the European legislature defined different categories of non-coupled vehicles, designated by the letters A to D, each distinguished from the others by reference to different criteria.

34.Thus, Article 3(1) of that directive classified, in ascending order, two- and three-wheel vehicles (category A), followed by motor vehicles other than those in that category with a maximum weight (3500 kg) and a maximum number of seats (not more than eight in addition to the driver’s seat), falling within category B.

Other vehicles were differentiated from that category based on the following characteristics:

–C: motor vehicles used for the ‘carriage of goods and whose permissible maximum weight exceeds 3500 kg’,

–D: motor vehicles used for the ‘carriage of passengers, with more than eight seats in addition to the driver’s seat’.

36.The model driving licence, appearing in Annex I to Directive 80/1263, contained the wording of those provisions.

37.Annex II to that directive, entitled ‘Minimum requirements for driving tests’, did not lay down any specific requirements for the theoretical test, allowing a distinction to be drawn between licences based on the vehicle category C or D.

38.As from 1 July 1996, the date of implementation of Directive 91/439, the legislature decided to distinguish between categories C and D in a different way, with a specific objective.

39.As is apparent from the third, fourth and fifth recitals, that directive represents a second step, after the step taken in 1980, to harmonise the categories and subcategories of vehicles as well as the minimum requirements for issuing driving licences, and to draw attention to the mandatory nature of the common provisions. (13) Those are the circumstances in which subcategories C1 and D1 were established by Article 3(2) of Directive 91/439.

40.The distinction between vehicle categories C and D, justified by the carriage of goods and passengers in Directive 80/1263, no longer appears in the same terms in the text of Directive 91/439. Category D is reserved for ‘motor vehicles used for the carriage of persons’ and category C, like subcategory C1, is defined by default as ‘motor vehicles other than those in category D’.

41.However, concrete expression was given to that distinction for the first time in the model driving licence set out in Annex I to that directive. The pictogram of two lorries or heavy goods vehicles can be seen opposite C. C1 appears alongside the smaller lorry or heavy goods vehicle. The pictogram of two buses can be seen opposite D. The bus appearing alongside D1 is shorter in length.

42.Annex II to Directive 91/439 lays down the conditions that must be fulfilled in order to drive vehicles and contains individual requirements for each vehicle category, including categories C and D, together with a specific list applying only to category D:

5.5. Category D

Drivers of vehicles in this category must demonstrate a knowledge of:

5.5.1.the rules concerning persons carried;

5.5.2.how to behave in the event of an accident;

5.5.3.they must also be capable of taking special vehicle safety measures.

The intention of retaining the specific category of vehicle ‘used for the carriage of persons’ exclusively (in other words, ‘category D’) is clearly apparent from the chosen wording of the new provisions of Directive 91/439.

Since then, Category C has been defined by default in the light of category D, not category B (14) based on the mass of the vehicles concerned. Account is also taken of the need not to limit category C vehicles to the carriage of goods alone. The carriage of persons, for which vehicles are exclusively designed, continues to justify the existence of a specific category (D).

The same criteria are used to define categories C1 and D1, covering vehicles with the same function but which are smaller in size (where the mass or number of passengers is limited). The mass of the vehicle is the distinguishing factor in categories (15) C and C1, while in categories D and D1 it is the number of passengers, being more than 8 (16) or more than 8 but not more than 16, respectively.

Directive 2006/126 refines the definition of those different categories (17) without, however, altering the main distinction in category D, which is reserved for the carriage of persons.

The exclusion of category D in the definition of categories C and C1 is retained and supplemented by the addition of category D1. The model driving licence contains the same pictograms as those described in point 41 of this Opinion. (18) Furthermore, the specifications appearing in Annex II, (19) to which the Czech Government also referred in its defence, (20) are consistent.

The objective pursued is set out in recital 12 of Directive 2006/126, according to which ‘the definitions of the categories should reflect to a greater extent the technical characteristics of the vehicles concerned and the skills needed to drive a vehicle’.

Thus, as regards the minimum requirements for driving tests and theory tests, the specific provisions of Directive 2006/126 relating to categories C and D as well as their subcategories again illustrate the distinction based on the main purpose of the transport:

‘4.1.9. Safety factors relating to vehicle loading: controlling the load (stowing and fastening), difficulties with different kinds of load (e.g. liquids, hanging loads, …), loading and unloading goods and the use of loading equipment (categories C, CE, C1, C1E only);

…

…

The same is true of the test of skills and behaviour:

‘5.2. The vehicles used in tests of skills and behaviour shall comply with the minimum criteria given below. Member States may make provisions for more stringent criteria or add others.

…

Category C: A category C vehicle with a maximum authorised mass of at least 12000 kg, a length of at least 8 m, a width of at least 2.40 m and capable of a speed of at least 80 km/h; fitted with anti-lock brakes, equipped with a gearbox having at least eight forward ratios and recording equipment as defined by Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 [ (21)]; the cargo compartment shall consist of a closed box body which is at least as wide and as high as the cab; the vehicle shall be presented with a minimum of 10000 kg real total mass;

…

Category C1: A subcategory C1 vehicle with a maximum authorised mass of at least 4000 kg, with a length of at least 5 m and capable of a speed of at least 80 km/h; fitted with anti-lock brakes and equipped with recording equipment as defined by Regulation … No 3821/85; the cargo compartment shall consist of a closed box body which is at least as wide and as high as the cab;

…

Category D: A category D vehicle with a length of at least 10 m, a width of at least 2.40 m and capable of a speed of at least 80 km/h; fitted with anti-lock brakes and equipped with recording equipment as defined by Regulation … No 3821/85;

…

Category D1: A subcategory D1 vehicle with a maximum authorised mass of at least 4000 kg, with a length of at least 5 m and capable of a speed of at least 80 km/h; fitted with anti-lock brakes and equipped with recording equipment as defined by Regulation … No 3821/85;’

Furthermore, following the same logic, the directive makes the following provision with respect to the skills and behaviour to be tested concerning categories C and D and their subcategories:

‘8.1.6. Checking the safety factors relating to vehicle loading: body, sheets, cargo doors, loading mechanism (if available), cabin locking (if available), way of loading, securing load (categories C, CE, C1, C1E only);

…

8.1.8. Being capable of taking special vehicle safety measures; controlling the body, service doors, emergency exits, first aid equipment, fire extinguishers and other safety equipment (categories D, DE, D1, D1E only);

…

8.2. Special manoeuvres to be tested with a bearing on road safety …

8.2.3. Parking safely for loading/unloading at a loading ramp/platform or similar installation (categories C, CE, C1, C1E only);

8.2.4. Parking to let passengers on or off the bus safely (categories D, DE, D1, D1E only).’

There is no doubt, in view of the wording of the provisions of Directive 2006/126, taken as a whole, that the definitions of the vehicle categories are based on the distinction relating to the carriage of persons, unchanged since 1980. This is a clear and precise criterion which justifies the exclusion of categories D1 or D in the definition of categories C and C1. Even though the decision to use compendious wording may be open to question, (22) the wording does not, to my mind, leave any room for ambiguity.

Consequently, the EU legislature’s decision to specify the maximum number of persons who may be transported in lorries (categories C or C1), as the final criterion for those vehicles, is not likely to cause confusion.

Nor is that decision likely to diminish the scope of the insertion of the words ‘other than those in categories D1 or D’ at the beginning of Article 4(4)(d) and (f) of Directive 2006/126, in the same way as in Article 3 of Directive 91/439. Its importance can be inferred from the requirement that the driver of a vehicle in that category must demonstrate knowledge relating to the carriage of passengers as well as their safety and security.

That is why, due to the overriding need to ensure the road safety of persons (23) in a uniform manner within the EU, I submit — as the Commission rightly argued in support of its application — that it is necessary to reproduce verbatim the clear and precise provisions of Directive 2006/126. (24) Furthermore, a word-for-word transposition makes it possible, in this particular case, to achieve another primary objective, pursued since First Directive 80/1263, being to facilitate the freedom of movement and freedom of establishment of persons by harmonising the rules relating to driving licences.

Accordingly, the choice of different criteria cannot be permitted to lead to an outcome which is contrary to that envisaged by Directive 2006/126, namely that the exclusive carriage of persons may be effected by drivers, authorised to drive category C or C1 vehicles, who have been asked to provide evidence primarily of their knowledge in respect of the receipt, carriage and delivery of goods, as well as their loading, stowing and unloading.

The example provided by the Commission is a perfect illustration of the consequences of the Czech legislature’s decision to set a threshold of more than eight persons for category D1: (25) a minibus under 8 metres in length which is used to carry less than eight persons falls within category C or C1 while the applicable requirements are those relating to the carriage of persons.

The argument put forward by the Czech Government which fails to take account of the particularity of the vehicle, in that it is not used for the carriage of goods, is therefore not persuasive. The overlap between the technical characteristics of the vehicles as a whole, characteristics which were retained in Directive 2006/126, is also to no avail since they relate to the use to which those vehicles are put. Thus, category C, which is typically reserved for heavy goods vehicles, is defined secondarily by the mass of the vehicle, the number of passengers being the same as that in category B. Category D is defined solely by reference to a passenger threshold and its subcategory D1 is differentiated by the maximum number of persons carried and by the length of the vehicle built for that purpose.

Having regard to all of the above, I take the view that, by not excluding D and D1 vehicles from categories C and C1, and by inserting a threshold of eight passengers in category D1, the Czech Republic failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(1) and Article 4(4)(d), (f) and (h) of Directive 2006/126.

Under Article 138(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, the unsuccessful party is to be ordered to pay the costs if they have been applied for in the successful party’s pleadings. Since the Commission applied for costs and the Czech Republic has been unsuccessful, the latter must be ordered to pay the costs.

In the light of the foregoing considerations, I propose that the Court should rule as follows:

(1) By failing to comply with the obligation to ensure that the definition of categories C1 and C covers only motor vehicles other than those in categories D1 or D, the Czech Republic failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(1) and Article 4(4)(d) and (f) of Directive 2006/126/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 December 2006 on driving licences.

(2) By restricting the definition of category D1 to motor vehicles designed and constructed for the carriage of more than eight passengers, the Czech Republic failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(1) and Article 4(4)(h) of that directive.

(3) The Czech Republic is ordered to pay the costs.

ANNEX: Overview of the content of the main directives on driving licences

Directive 80/1263

Article 3(1)

Directive 91/439

Article 3(1) and (2)

Article 4(4)(d), (f), (h) and (j)

First Council Directive of 4 December 1980 on the introduction of a Community driving licence (OJ 1980 L 375, p. 1).

Council Directive of 29 July 1991 on driving licences (OJ 1991 L 237, p. 1).

See paragraph 5 of the reply.

See paragraphs 19 and 20 of the defence.

See paragraph 7 of the rejoinder.

‘[F]or the carriage of more than eight passengers in addition to the driver’ in Article 4(4)(j) of Directive 2006/126.

See the overview table annexed to this Opinion.

In accordance with the method of analysis advocated by the Court in its judgment of 26 October 2006, Commission v Spain (C‑36/05, EU:C:2006:672, paragraphs 24 and 25).

Vehicles with a maximum mass not exceeding 3500 kg fall within that category.

Which is the second criterion for those categories, as in Directive 80/1263.

The more than eight-person threshold should also be considered alongside the ceiling appearing in category B.

See recital 2 of that directive.

Model extended by Directive 2011/94.

Extracts quoted in points 49 to 51 of this Opinion, emphasis added.

See paragraphs 15 to 17 of the defence.

Council Regulation of 20 December 1985 on recording equipment in road transport (OJ 1985 L 370, p. 8).

Would it not be better, in order to dispel all doubts, to opt in the future for the words ‘other than those used exclusively for the carriage of persons’?

See paragraph 51 of the judgment of 22 May 2014, Glatzel (C‑356/12, EU:C:2014:350) and the case-law cited: ‘In that connection, according to settled case-law, the improvement of road safety is an objective of general interest of the European Union (see, to that effect, inter alia, judgments of 5 October 1994, van Schaik, C‑55/93, EU:C:1994:363, paragraph 19; of 21 March 2002, Cura Anlagen, C‑451/99, EU:C:2002:195, paragraph 59; of 15 March 2007, Commission v Finland, C‑54/05, EU:C:2007:168, paragraph 40; of 10 February 2009, Commission v Italy, C‑110/05, EU:C:2009:66, paragraph 60; of 22 October 2009, Commission v Portugal, C‑438/08, EU:C:2009:651, paragraph 48; of 11 March 2010, Attanasio Group, C‑384/08, EU:C:2010:133, paragraph 50; of 19 May 2011, Grasser, C‑184/10, EU:C:2011:324, paragraph 26; and of 13 October 2011, Apelt, C‑224/10, EU:C:2011:655, paragraph 47).’ Also see, regarding the purpose of Directive 2006/126, considered very recently, judgment of 26 April 2017, Popescu (C‑632/15, EU:C:2017:303, paragraph 40).

To be distinguished from the situations where the Court has held that ‘[as regards] the transposition of a directive into domestic law … a general legal context may, depending on the content of the directive, be adequate for the purpose provided that it does indeed guarantee the full application of the directive in a sufficiently clear and precise manner so that, where the directive is intended to create rights for individuals, the persons concerned can ascertain the full extent of their rights and, where appropriate, rely on them before the national courts’. See judgment of 9 April 1987, Commission v Italy (363/85, EU:C:1987:196, paragraph 7 and the case-law cited).

Even though it had been removed by Directive 2006/126 to be replaced by the length of the vehicle.