GENERAL NOTICE

In January 2025, this online platform will be integrated into Boomportaal (www.boomportaal.nl), after which this platform will be discontinued. From that moment on, this URL will automatically redirect to Boomportaal.

DOI: 10.5553/EELC/187791072020005004035

European Employment Law CasesAccess_open

Pending Cases

Case C-502/20, Free Movement, Work and Residence Permit

TP – v – Institut des experts en automobiles, reference lodged by the Cour d’appel de Mons (Belgium) on 5 October 2020

Keywords Free Movement, Work and Residence Permit
DOI
Show PDF Show fullscreen
Statistics Citation
This article has been viewed times.
This article been downloaded 0 times.
Suggested citation
, "Case C-502/20, Free Movement, Work and Residence Permit", European Employment Law Cases, 4, (2020):288-288

Dit artikel wordt geciteerd in

      1. Can the provisions of Article 5[(1)(2)](b) and Article 6 of the Belgian Law of 15 May 2007 on the recognition and protection of the profession of automotive expert, read in conjunction with the provisions of the Law of 12 February 2008 establishing a general framework for the recognition of EU professional qualifications, in particular Articles 6, 8 and 9 thereof, be interpreted as meaning that a service provider who changes his or her place of establishment to another Member State cannot, after that change, be entered, in his or her country of origin (in this instance, Belgium), in the IEA’s register of temporary and occasional service providers with a view to pursuing temporary and occasional activity in that country? Is such an interpretation compatible with the freedom of establishment granted under EU law?

      2. Are the provisions of Article 5[(1)(2)](b) and Article 6 of the Belgian Law of 15 May 2007 on the recognition and protection of the profession of automotive expert, read in conjunction with the provisions of the Law of 12 February 2008 establishing a general framework for the recognition of EU professional qualifications, in particular Articles 6, 8 and 9 thereof, interpreted as meaning that the concept of temporary and occasional activity precludes the possibility for a service provider established in one Member State to provide services in another Member State if those services are to a degree recurrent, without being regular, or to possess some forms of infrastructure in that other Member State, compatible with the abovementioned provisions of the directive?


Print this article