The Court examines the position of a Community national who was awarded a diploma in medicine in Argentina and wishes to practise in France, and that of a Luxembourg doctor who trained in Austria
Dr Hocsman, of Argentine origin, has a diploma in medicine awarded in 1976 by the University of Buenos Aires, Argentina, and a specialist diploma in urology awarded in 1982 by the University of Barcelona, Spain. He acquired Spanish nationality in 1986 and became a French citizen in 1998. His Argentine diploma was recognised in 1980 as equivalent to a Spanish university degree in medicine and surgery. He was thus able to practise medicine in Spain and train as a specialist there. Various certificates testify to Dr Hocsman's work for several years in Spain. Since 1990 he has worked as an assistant or associate specialising in urology in a number of French hospitals.
On 27 June 1997 the French Minister for Employment and Solidarity refused to allow Dr Hocsman to register with the national medical association on the ground that under the French regulations his diploma from Argentina did not entitle him to practise medicine in France.
Dr Erpelding, of Luxembourg origin, has a diploma in medicine awarded in 1985 by the University of Innsbruck, Austria, and approved on 11 April 1986 by the Luxembourg Minister of Education. The Luxembourg Minister of Health also authorised Dr Erpelding to practise as a specialist in internal medicine in Luxembourg on 29 August 1991, after he had been authorised by the competent Austrian authorities to practise in that specialisation on 10 April 1991. The Austrian authorities had awarded Dr Erpelding the diploma of specialist in internal medicine, cardiology sector.
On 25 April 1997 the Luxembourg Minister of Health refused to allow Dr Erpelding to use the title of specialist in cardiology, since that was not a specialisation recognised by the Austrian authorities: the Luxembourg authorities stated that they could only recognise diplomas as originally worded, and the specialisation put forward by Dr Erpelding (cardiology) was not recognised as such by the country in which he had been trained.
***
The national courts hearing the cases (the Tribunal Administratif de Châlons-en-Champagne in Dr Hocsman's case and the Cour Administrative, Luxembourg, in the case of Dr Erpelding) put questions to the Court of Justice of the European Communities on various aspects of the Community legislation in force on the recognition of diplomas.
The Court of Justice observed that the aim of the harmonisation directives concerning the mutual recognition of diplomas, including medical diplomas, was to establish a system under which the Member States were obliged to recognise certain diplomas as equivalent, and could not require the persons concerned to comply with requirements other than those laid down by the relevant directives.
Such mutual recognition makes it superfluous, as regards persons who satisfy the conditions set out in the directives on recognition, for their diplomas to be recognised by the host Member States in accordance with the case-law which the Court has developed for situations where there is no such automatic recognition.
According to that case-law, the national authorities to whom applications are made for the recognition of medical diplomas awarded in other Member States must:
The Court observed that that case-law is the expression of a principle inherent in the fundamental freedoms of the Treaty.
***
In those circumstances, the Court held that the national court should assess whether Dr Hocsman's diploma was to be accepted as equivalent to the corresponding French diploma; in particular, it would have to consider whether the recognition in Spain of Dr Hocsman's Argentine diploma as equivalent to the Spanish degree in medicine and surgery had been made on the basis of criteria comparable to those laid down by Community law to ensure that Member States may rely on the diplomas in medicine awarded by the other Member States.
The Court further considered that the right to use the title of doctor or specialist in the host Member State (in the language of that State and according to its terminology) is the necessary corollary of the mutual recognition of diplomas provided for by the Community directive. However, it held that that right applies only if the diploma in question appears in the list of diplomas in the Community directive. That was not the case with Dr Erpelding's diploma, as the specialisation in cardiology did not exist as such in Austria. In those circumstances, the Court held that the Directive must be interpreted as giving doctors the right to use their academic titles, and if appropriate their abbreviations, in the language of the Member State of origin or the Member State from which they come, with the host State retaining the right to authorise the use of the title in another language.
Unofficial document for media use, not binding on the Court of Justice. Available in Danish, English, Finnish, French, German, Italian, Spanish and Swedish.
For the full text of the judgment, please consult our Internet site www.curia.eu.int at about 3 p.m. today.
For further information, please contact Fionnuala Connolly, Tel: (00 352) 4303 3355 Fax: (00 352) 4303 2731.