(AGENPARL) - Roma, 12 Febbraio 2026 - (AGENPARL) – Thu 12 February 2026 PRESS RELEASE No 13/26
Luxembourg, 12 February 2026
Judgment of the Court in Case C-48/24 | Vilniaus tarptautinė mokykla
The obligation imposed by Lithuanian law on a private international school
to review whether its staff meet a requirement for proficiency in the
Lithuanian language potentially fails to have regard to freedom of
establishment
While the national legislation appears to be appropriate for ensuring the legitimate objective of protecting and
promoting the Lithuanian language, it may fail to have regard to freedom of establishment on account of the
requirements for providing proof of proficiency in that language by the staff concerned and on account of
there being no exception to that language requirement
A private international school has been active in Vilnius (Lithuania) since 2004. It obtained the necessary
administrative consents to deliver primary and secondary education programmes in English. In 2022, the National
Language Inspectorate carried out an inspection of that institution in order to review its compliance with the
requirements laid down in Law on the State Language. It found that some of the school’s employees, including the
director, had not passed the Lithuanian language exam. Under that law, teaching and administrative staff in regular
contact with the public and the administrative authorities are required to be proficient in the Lithuanian language. In
order to prove that they have the required level, those persons must provide a certificate issued by the National
Education Agency, based on language tests organised in the territory of Lithuania. Lastly, the educational
institutions concerned are required to review whether those persons meet that language requirement.
The Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania, hearing the case on final appeal, decided to refer a question to the
Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling regarding the compatibility of Lithuanian legislation with EU law.
In today’s judgment, the Court of Justice finds that the Law on the State Language constitutes a restriction on
freedom of establishment. It makes it less attractive for nationals of other Member States to set up and operate an
educational establishment in Lithuania delivering education programmes in a language other than Lithuanian.
However, the law is appropriate for ensuring the objective of protecting and promoting the official language of that
Member State is attained. It encourages the use of the language by persons subject to that requirement in their
relations with pupils, pupil’s parents and the general public, as well as with the national administrative authorities,
as regards the administrative staff in particular.
However, in relation to the requirements for providing proof which establishes that the language
requirement has been met, the Court considers that the Lithuanian law, insofar as it requires the provision
of a certificate issued by the National Education Agency on the basis of language tests organised in the
territory of Lithuania, appears to go beyond what is necessary to achieve the legitimate objective pursued,
which it is for the referring court to ascertain.
It also states that the language requirement in question appears to apply as soon as the persons concerned
Communications Directorate
Press and Information Unit
curia.europa.eu
begin their duties, irrespective of the duration of their employment contract, without any exceptions or
flexibility being laid down in that regard. According to the Court, the national law therefore appears to be
disproportionate in relation to the objective pursued, which is for the referring court to assess.
NOTE: A reference for a preliminary ruling allows the courts and tribunals of the Member States, in disputes which
have been brought before them, to refer questions to the Court of Justice about the interpretation of EU law or the
validity of an European Union act. The Court of Justice does not decide the dispute itself. It is for the national court
or tribunal to dispose of the case in accordance with the Court’s decision, which is similarly binding on other
national courts or tribunals before which a similar issue is raised.
Unofficial document for media use, not binding on the Court of Justice.
The full text and, as the case may be, an abstract of the judgment is published on the CURIA website on the day of
delivery.
Stay Connected!
Communications Directorate