On 4 October 2024, the Court pronounced its ruling on the validity of the so-called Mobility Package on social standards in international road transport. While broadly confirming its validity, the Court invalidated the specific obligation requiring vehicles to return every eight weeks to the operational centre of the transport undertaking. According to the Court, the EU legislature had not established that it had sufficient information to enable it to assess the proportionality of that measure.
The impact of the ruling will clearly undermine the efforts made to tackle letterbox companies, social dumping and unfair competition on European roads. For more information, please also see the press release of the European Transport Workers' Federation.
Background of the case
15 applications for actions for annulment from seven Member States were registered by the Court of Justice on 18 December 2020.
The cases (15) involve seven Member States: Poland (3), Malta (1), Hungary (1), Cyprus (2), Romania (3), Bulgaria (3) and Lithuania (2).
As part of the Mobility Package, the following legislative acts have been challenged (in part and/or in their entirety):
- Directive (EU) 2020/1057 on the posting of drivers in road transport (6 times);
- Regulation (EU) 2020/1054 on driving and rest time (5 times);
- Regulation (EU) 2020/1055 on access to occupation and cabotage (7 times).
The claims are based on legal arguments ranging from the free movement of workers, services and the freedom of establishment, to the principles of non-discrimination and proportionality, as well as grounds of environmental protection, transport policy, legal certainty and sincere cooperation, etc.
The cases have been published in the Official Journal on 18 January 2021.
A joint hearing took place on 24-25 April 2023.
The Opinion of the Advocate General was published on 14 November 2024.
Ruling of the Court
In the final Judgement of 4 October 2024, the Court followed the line of Advocate General, broadly confirming the validity of the Mobility Package, while annulling the 'return of the vehicle' obligation. As a result, the Court invalidated point 3 of Article 1 of Regulation 2020/1055 in so far as it inserted paragraph 1(b) in Article 5 of Regulation No 1071/200.
You have to be connected to access to our analyses.