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

  • C-ITS in Europe: It’s the governance, stupid!
    March 3, 2023
    Cooperative ITS (C-ITS) is coming – in fact, it’s already here. But who has responsibility for making it work? Richard Lax of Kapsch TrafficCom thinks there are lessons to be learned from the European experience
  • Use a scooter - wear a helmet!
    April 4, 2022
    UK parliamentary group recommends mandatory helmets and no riders under 16 years old
  • UK drug-driving in the spotlight
    March 23, 2012
    A panel of scientists and academics is being established by the UK Department for Transport (DfT) to advise on the possible implementation of rules covering drug-driving, along the lines of existing drink-driving laws. MDMA, cocaine, opiates and cannabis are seen by the DfT as the primary drugs for consideration. The experts will examine whether such a law should be introduced, with elements such as possible legal limits to be looked into. If it is decided the move is technically feasible, with regard to pu
  • Monitoring and transparency preserve enforcement's reputation
    July 30, 2012
    What can be done to preserve automated enforcement's reputation in the face of media and public criticism? Here, system manufacturers and suppliers talk about what they think are the most appropriate business models. Recent events in Italy only served to once again to push automated enforcement into the media spotlight. At the heart of the matter were the numerous alleged instances of local authorities and their contract suppliers of enforcement services colluding to illegally shorten amber signal phase tim