CJEU Decision: Legal Training Should Be Accessible Across the EU

Luxembourg/Brussels/Vienna – The European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled on Thursday that Austrian regulations requiring part of a trainee lawyer’s practical training to be completed in Austria are incompatible with the freedom of movement for workers. This decision, stemming from case C-807/23, Jones Day, emphasizes that training completed abroad can be considered equivalent if it provides comparable experiences to training in Austria.

To qualify as a lawyer in Austria, one must complete a five-year practical training period. Out of this, at least three years and seven months must occur in Austria, with a minimum of three years under the supervision of a practicing lawyer. An Austrian trainee lawyer completed her practical training at the law firm Jones Day in Frankfurt, where she was mentored by an Austrian lawyer. However, the Vienna Bar Association denied her registration as a trainee lawyer and refused to grant her a certificate of limited representation authority, citing the aforementioned regulation.

Challenge to the Supreme Court

The trainee lawyer appealed the Bar Association’s decision to the Austrian Supreme Court. She clarified that her work was exclusively related to Austrian law. The Supreme Court subsequently sought clarification from the ECJ on whether the requirement for part of the training to occur within Austria violates the freedom of movement for workers.

In its ruling, the ECJ informed the Austrian Supreme Court that EU regulations should be interpreted as contradicting national laws like Austria’s regarding this matter. The requirement aimed at ensuring that a lawyer gains sufficient experience in national law and familiarity with Austrian authorities and courts is excessive in achieving these objectives.

The ECJ concluded that completing practical training with an Austrian-registered lawyer operating in another EU member state, provided it offers comparable experiences to that in Austria, satisfies the aims of the Austrian regulation. This interpretation is considered less restrictive than the limitations imposed by the current regulation. It is essential to note that the European Court of Justice does not adjudicate specific cases but rather interprets EU law.