1. 1 Access to the Profession - Application of Annex IV

2. Overview 1. 1. Challenges 2. 2. Good repute – Who? 3. 3. Good repute – Which sanctions? 4. 4. Administrative procedure 5. 5. Consequences

3. 1. Challenges of Annex IV 1. 1. Type of infringement regardless the penalty; 2. 2. The obligation of an administrative procedure; 3. 3. “Penalties” instead of only “convictions” (more data providers);

4. 2. Good Repute – who?

5. Good Repute – Who? Article 6, paragraph 1: The conduct of the undertaking, its transport managers and any other relevant person.

6. Belgian Application The undertaking; The transport manager(s); Persons entrusted with the daily management (CEO,... );

7. The conduct of the driver? The transport manager(s) / undertaking will usually be prosecuted (along with drivers) since they will be held (criminally) responsible for the behavior of the drivers. For example: infringements on driving times & rest periods

8. 3. Which sanctions?

9. Article 6, paragraph 2 Article 6, paragraph 2: convictions or penalties;   Convictions + Every payment that drops criminal prosecution (i.e. on-the-spot-fines, administrative sanctions,...).

10. Rehabilitation One who has been convicted of a serious criminal offence or incurred a penalty for one of the most serious infringements as set out in Annex IV shall be rehabilitated after 2 years (or 4 in case of repetition) regarding the requirement of good repute;

11. 4. Administrative procedure

12. Article 6, paragraph 2 When an infringements on Annex IV has been committed, the competent authority of the Member State of establishment shall carry out in an appropriate and timely manner a duly completed administrative procedure, which shall include, if appropriate, a check at the premises of the undertaking concerned.

13. 2 Phases: A. Filter procedure Examination by a small group (4 or 5 persons) within the Ministry of Transport; Ad hoc approach  sort of jurisprudence; 2 way outcome: good repute OR treatment by the Road Haulage Commission.

14. B. Road Haulage Commission Existing official commission; Composition:   President + vice-president   Members from the Ministry of Transport   Official Representatives for the Transport Undertakings, Employees,... Rights of Defence; Result: advice – Decision by Minister of Delegate; In case of loss of good repute: reasoning + justification.

15. What shall be taken into account? 1. 1. The precise circumstances of the infringement; 2. 2. The impact of the infringement on road safety and the competitiveness of the undertaking; 3. 3. The evolution of the behavior of the undertaking or the persons involved (frequency of infringements, …); 4. 4. The number of vehicles belonging to the undertaking

16. (Dis)advantages Advantages Involvement of all stakeholders; Ad hoc approach – proportionate response in an individual case. Disadvantages Heavy procedure.

17. 5. Consequences 17

18. Withdrawal Loss of good repute results in the withdrawal of the licence; The withdrawal is never permanent – once the good repute is restored, the licence can be reissued; Future: possible “suspension”.