WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1682/97 by Franz LINSER to the Commission. Training of German pupil barristers by Austrian lawyers
10. 2. 98 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 45/79 Finally, on 18 June 1996, the Commission adopted a strategy intended to reduce pollution by vehicles. That strategy stresses the responsibility that is shared by the Community and the national and local authorities for reducing air pollution. New standards for reducing vehicle emissions form part of that strategy. (1) OJ L 36, 9. 2. 1988. (2) OJ L 296, 21. 11. 1996. (3) COM(96) 540. (98/C 45/95) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1682/97 by Franz Linser (NI) to the Commission (20 May 1997) Subject: Training of German pupil barristers by Austrian lawyers Prior to Austriaís accession to the EEA and the EU it used to be the case that foreign pupil barristers could only handle internal documents in lawyerís offices. They were not allowed to represent clients before Austrian authorities and courts because Austrian citizenship was a requirement for practising as a lawyer. The legal position has not been affected by Austriaís accession to the EU. In order to represent clients before Austrian courts and authorities, lawyers need an authorization issued by the competent bar association. However, the latter only issue authorizations for prospective members of such associations. Does the failure to admit German pupil barristers to represent parties before authorities and courts in Austria as a result of bar associations not issuing an authorization represent a violation against freedom of movement in the Internal Market? Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (2 July 1997) Council Directive 77/249/EEC to facilitate the effective exercise by lawyers of freedom to provide services (1) and Council Directive 89/48/EEC on a general system for the recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years’ duration (2) apply exclusively to fully qualified lawyers, i. e. persons who have already been authorized to practise the profession of lawyer in a Member State or who possess all the qualifications necessary in order to do so. Trainee lawyers and trainee judges do not, therefore, belong to this category. The same applies in the case of the amended proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive to facilitate practice of the profession of lawyer on a permanent basis in a Member State other than in which the qualification was obtained. (3) As regards legal representation, both Directive 77/249/EEC and the above-mentioned proposal for a Directive permit Member States, subject to certain conditions, to allow lawyers from other Member States who are not fully authorized to practise in the host Member State to work together with a lawyer who is authorized to practise there. The only point to examine in respect of trainee lawyers and trainee judges is whether or not the directly applicable provisions of the Treaty, and in particular the ban on discrimination contained in Article 6, have been infringed. In order to do this, additional information would need to be provided, particularly on the rules governing representation before Austrian courts, on the status of trainee lawyers and trainee judges, on the powers conferred by legitimation and on the training requirements for German trainee judges in Austria. A difference in treatment based solely on the nationality of the persons concerned would undoubtedly constitute an infringement of Community law. The Commission would like to receive additional information on each of these points. (1) OJ L 78, 26. 3. 1977. (2) OJ L 19, 24. 1. 1989. (3) OJ C 355, 25. 11. 1996