Mr. Piontek (Case A) and Italy (Case B)
Cite as https://mymun.com/ppdb/18645
Mr. Frankfurter is an Estonian national who got into the Estonian University of Life Sciences and studies Veterinary Medicine. The University subsequently accepted him for the Master’s programme, in which he graduated in 2005. After completing his studies, he proceeded to search for veterinary training, as in Estonia two years of such training are a prerequisite for obtaining the title of Veterinary Surgeon. On the 2nd of May 2005, he finally got accepted by the “Estonian Animal Heaven”. He moved afterwards to Italy. The Italian authorities required Mr. Frankfurter to have an adaptation period of three years. Having finished the aforesaid period, he decided to open his own clinic in Grosseto. Afterwards he moved to Poland and he went to the Polish authorities’ office to file the request for having his Estonian title of Veterinary Surgeon recognised. It was revealed that the notorious surgeon had never completed his period of training in Estonia. The two years of training in Estonia had been done in the slaughterhouse neighbouring the butcher’s farm, instead of Dr. Schnitzelmann’s proper veterinary clinic. Without any hesitation, the Polish authorities notified Mr. Frankfurter about the refusal to recognise his title. The refusal was grounded in the double-checked evidence that Mr. Frankfurter had never fully qualified as a veterinary surgeon in Estonia. ‘Dr.’ Frankfurter presented a second request - this time based on his Italian title of veterinary surgeon - to the Polish authorities. The Polish authorities refused giving the following reason: ‘The fact that Mr. Frankfurter was able to pursue the practice of veterinary surgeon in Italy and that his former clinics continue to run up to this date does not mean he can claim to be any sort of ‘Veterinary Surgeon’ for the purposes of Polish law’.
Request for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU from the Romanian Supreme Court
Substance of the case