This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62015CA0225
Case C-225/15: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 8 September 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Reggio Calabria — Italy) — Criminal proceedings against Domenico Politanò (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 49 TFEU — Freedom of establishment — Betting and gambling — Restrictions — Overriding reasons of public interest — Proportionality — Public procurement — Conditions for participating in a call for tenders and assessment of economic and financial standing — Exclusion of the tenderer for not presenting certificates of economic and financial standing issued by two different banks — Directive 2004/18/EC — Article 47 — Applicability)
Case C-225/15: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 8 September 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Reggio Calabria — Italy) — Criminal proceedings against Domenico Politanò (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 49 TFEU — Freedom of establishment — Betting and gambling — Restrictions — Overriding reasons of public interest — Proportionality — Public procurement — Conditions for participating in a call for tenders and assessment of economic and financial standing — Exclusion of the tenderer for not presenting certificates of economic and financial standing issued by two different banks — Directive 2004/18/EC — Article 47 — Applicability)
Case C-225/15: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 8 September 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Reggio Calabria — Italy) — Criminal proceedings against Domenico Politanò (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 49 TFEU — Freedom of establishment — Betting and gambling — Restrictions — Overriding reasons of public interest — Proportionality — Public procurement — Conditions for participating in a call for tenders and assessment of economic and financial standing — Exclusion of the tenderer for not presenting certificates of economic and financial standing issued by two different banks — Directive 2004/18/EC — Article 47 — Applicability)
OJ C 402, 31.10.2016, p. 9–10
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
31.10.2016 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 402/9 |
Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 8 September 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Reggio Calabria — Italy) — Criminal proceedings against Domenico Politanò
(Case C-225/15) (1)
((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 49 TFEU - Freedom of establishment - Betting and gambling - Restrictions - Overriding reasons of public interest - Proportionality - Public procurement - Conditions for participating in a call for tenders and assessment of economic and financial standing - Exclusion of the tenderer for not presenting certificates of economic and financial standing issued by two different banks - Directive 2004/18/EC - Article 47 - Applicability))
(2016/C 402/11)
Language of the case: Italian
Referring court
Tribunale di Reggio Calabria
Party in the main proceedings
Domenico Politanò
Operative part of the judgment
|
1. |
Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts, in particular Article 47, must be interpreted as meaning that national legislation governing the grant of concessions in the field of betting and gambling, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, does not fall within its scope. |
|
2. |
Article 49 TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding a national provision, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which imposes on operators wishing to respond to a call for tenders for the grant of concessions in the field of betting and gambling the obligation of providing evidence of their economic and financial standing by means of statements issued by at least two banks, without also allowing that standing to be proved by other means, where such a provision is capable of satisfying the conditions of proportionality laid down by the case-law of the Court, which is for the referring court to ascertain. |