In a ruling issued on 3 October, the CJEU struck down the provision requiring vehicles involved in international transport to return to the operational centre of the company every eight weeks. The Court found that the European Parliament and the Council needed more information to justify the proportionality of the measure when it was adopted.
“The Parliament and the Council have not established that they had sufficient information at their disposal…to assess its proportionality,” the judgment stated.
However, the Court dismissed other objections brought forward by Lithuania, Bulgaria, Romania, Cyprus, Hungary, Malta, and Poland. These countries had challenged several key components of the Mobility Package, including:
- Prohibition on weekly rest in vehicles: Drivers are barred from taking regular or compensatory weekly rest periods inside their vehicles. This rule was already part of earlier legislation, and the Court confirmed it.
- Driver return obligations: Transport companies are required to ensure drivers can return to their operational centre or place of residence every three or four weeks to take their weekly rest period. The Court ruled that this obligation allows drivers to choose where they take their rest.
- Cabotage rules: The package introduces a four-day waiting period after cabotage operations – domestic transport services carried out in a foreign country – to prevent continuous activity in a host country. The Court ruled this was necessary to avoid permanent cabotage operations, ensuring fair competition.
- Posting of drivers: The Court upheld the classification of drivers as “posted workers” when carrying out cross-border operations, meaning they are entitled to the working conditions of the country where they are operating, particularly in terms of remuneration.
The ruling reaffirmed the legality of these provisions, which were designed to improve working conditions for drivers while ensuring fair competition between transport companies across the EU.
The Court points out that the freedom to provide services in the field of transport is subject to a special regime.
“Transport undertakings have a right freely to provide services only in so far as that right has been granted to them by measures adopted by the EU legislature, such as those falling within the scope of the Mobility Package,” the ECJ notes.
Moreover, “this package of measures does not prohibit transport undertakings from exercising freedom of establishment by setting up subsidiaries in the Member States in which they intend to provide transport services and thus establishing themselves more closely to the actual demand for their services,” the court adds.
The CJEU also noted that the EU legislature had sought to “strike a new balance between the various interests involved,” aiming to create a safer and more socially responsible road transport sector.
While the countries challenging the Mobility Package argued that the rules disproportionately affected companies in peripheral EU states, the Court found that these rules applied equally across the Union. Any greater impact on companies in certain regions was attributed to their business models, which focused on servicing markets far from their country of establishment.