Skip to main content

Cross-border enforcement directive annulled, but remains in place

The European Court of Justice has stopped a directive designed to ease cross-border exchange of information adopted by the European Parliament and Council in October 2011. This directive sets up a procedure for the exchange of information between member states in relation to eight road traffic offences (speeding, non-use of a seat-belt, failing to stop at a red traffic light, drink-driving, driving under the influence of drugs, failing to wear a crash helmet, use of a forbidden lane and illegally using a m
May 12, 2014 Read time: 2 mins
The European Court of Justice has stopped a directive designed to ease cross-border exchange of information adopted by the European Parliament and Council in October 2011.  This directive sets up a procedure for the exchange of information between member states in relation to eight road traffic offences (speeding, non-use of a seat-belt, failing to stop at a red traffic light, drink-driving, driving under the influence of drugs, failing to wear a crash helmet, use of a forbidden lane and illegally using a mobile telephone). Member states may access each other's national vehicle registration data to trace the person liable for the offence.

The European Parliament and Council adopted the Directive on 25 October 2011 without using the correct legal basis required by the Commission, that is, transport safety, and using instead EU police cooperation.

The reasoning behind the annulment is basically technical. According to the Court, the directive was adopted on an incorrect legal basis, saying that both the aim and the content of the directive must be examined in order to determine whether it could validly be adopted, given that the main or predominant aim of the directive is to improve road safety.

However, the Court also decided that the annulment could have negative consequences for EU transport policy and decided that, given the importance of the pursuit of the aims of Directive 2011/82 for the improvement of road safety, it should be maintained for a maximum of one year from the date of judgement, whilst a new directive, based on transport safety, is prepared.

Related Content

  • New equipment aids clamp-down on drug drivers
    October 30, 2015
    The type-approval of roadside drug testing equipment could bring about fundamental changes to the way police tackle the problem as Colin Sowman finds out. It has been almost 50 years since the first drink-driving laws were introduced but the problem persists: the European Commission estimates that 25% of road fatalities in the EU are the result of alcohol consumption. Statistics from the UK show that 20% of drivers killed in road accidents in 2012 were over the blood alcohol limit for driving.
  • The effectiveness of roads policing
    March 6, 2015
    The Joint Roads Policing Unit of Thames Valley Police and Hampshire Constabulary in the UK commissioned the Transport Research laboratory (TRL) to evaluate the effectiveness of their roads policing strategy in terms of reducing the number of people killed and seriously injured in road collisions. The focus was on the fatal four causes of collisions: speeding, drink-driving, not wearing a seat belt and drivers using mobile phones. TRL carried out a detailed literature review, in-depth review and analysis of
  • ETSC criticises road safety 'own goal'
    March 28, 2022
    Safety group highlights concerns over data retrieval issues in collision investigations
  • Europe’s road safety gains have stagnated EU
    March 17, 2017
    Europe will fail to meet its road death targets as enforcement budgets are slashed and drivers face an epidemic of distractions. The European Union will not achieve its aim of halving the number of people killed on its roads each year by 2020, delegates to Tispol’s (the organisation of European traffic police) annual conference in Manchester were told. “The target will be missed because there was only a 17% decrease in road fatalities across Europe between 2010 and 2015 when [the rate of reduction] should h