The CJEU has ruled that they violate the freedom of establishment that protects EU rules, insofar as the limitation to one concessionaire per geographical area presupposes a disproportionate condition
The current points-based driver’s license system, which also extends the balance to 15 after six years without committing serious offences, provides a wide buffer to drive without fear of having the driver’s license revoked. However, it is also possible that violations of the regulations occur or that all points are lost in one fell swoop in the same week.
In such a situation, or in less drastic cases, the General Directorate of Traffic (DGT) offers
two formulas to restore the points. One, passive, is achieved by not committing any offense involving the loss of points for two years. The other, more constructive and faster, through courses that, in the words of the institution, provide “awareness and re-education on the road to recovering up to a maximum of 6 points, never exceeding your initial point balance.”
Now the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) considers the method of distribution of these courses illegal through a tender organized in 2014. In it, five different areas of the national territory were allocated (except Catalonia and the Basque Country) in which the successful bidder of each would be the only entity authorized to conduct retraining courses for drivers through “exclusive control”.
They therefore point out that the system applied by the DGT to distribute the award of the courses for the collection of driving license points is contrary to the freedom of establishment that protects the EU rules, as the limitation to one concessionaire per geographical area is disproportionate is. condition.
In particular, it points out that the Internal Market Services Directive precludes national legislation according to which the award of the said courses must be made through a public service concession, since “it goes beyond what is necessary to achieve the public interest objective pursued”. achieve”, which is to improve road safety. For example, the CJEU points out in its judgment that Spanish legislation constitutes “a quantitative and territorial restriction” on the freedom of establishment which would only be justified if “it is not discriminatory and if it is necessary and proportionate”.
“Like any project, public or private, there is a start-up phase and a maintenance phase. In the case of the driver license recovery courses, it was decided that it would initially be carried out by an administrative concession mechanism, but when it entered the maintenance phase due to various circumstances, it was not well done,” he explains.
Ramon Ledesmaadvisory board member of PONS Mobility.
“In 2018, the National Court already made it clear that the system was flawed, but it was still decided to continue the torment of something that clearly needed to be changed. What the Court of Justice of the European Union is doing now is telling the Supreme Court that we must now definitively switch to another model, in line with what the National Court ruled almost 5 years ago,” he adds.
“So all that’s left is for the Supreme Court to attend all of the history and we’ll move on. We had an opportunity as a country in the 2021 Traffic Law reform, but we decided as a country to do nothing and expand a “legal gum” that no longer gives of itself,” he concludes.
Source: La Verdad
I am Ida Scott, a journalist and content author with a passion for uncovering the truth. I have been writing professionally for Today Times Live since 2020 and specialize in political news. My career began when I was just 17; I had already developed a knack for research and an eye for detail which made me stand out from my peers.
