Case C‑303/15

Naczelnik Urzędu Celnego I w Ł.

v

G.M.

and

M.S.

(Request for a preliminary ruling

from the Sąd Okręgowy w Łodzi)

‛Reference for a preliminary ruling — Technical regulations in the gambling sector — Directive 98/34/EC — Concept of ‘technical regulation’ — Obligation on Member States to notify the European Commission of all draft technical regulations — Inapplicability of rules classifiable as technical regulations not notified to the Commission’

Summary — Judgment of the Court (First Chamber), 13 October 2016

1. Questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Jurisdiction of the Court — Identification of the relevant aspects of EU law — Reformulation of the questions

   (Art. 267 TFEU)

2. Approximation of laws — Information procedure in the field of technical standards and regulations and of rules on Information Society services — Directive 98/34 — Technical regulation — Meaning — Obligation on Member States to notify the Commission of all draft technical regulations — Provision of national law requiring a licence to operate a gaming casino in order to organise roulette games, card games dice games and gaming on machines — Precluded

   (European Parliament and Council Directive 98/34, as amended by Directive 98/48, Arts 1 and 8(1))

1.  See the text of the judgment.

   (see para. 16)

2.  Article 1 of Directive 98/34 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations and of rules on Information Society services, as amended by Directive 98/48, must be interpreted as meaning that a provision of national law that requires a licence to operate a gaming casino in order to organise roulette games, card games dice games and gaming on machines does not fall within the scope of the concept of a ‘technical regulation’, within the meaning of that directive, subject to obligatory notification under Article 8(1) of that directive, the penalty for failure to fulfil that obligation being that such a regulation is inapplicable.

   First, such a provision does not constitute a ‘technical specification’, within the meaning of Article 1(3) of Directive 98/34, since it does not refer to a product or its packaging as such and does not lay down one of the required characteristics of a product. Second, that provision cannot be placed in the category of ‘rules on [information society] services’, within the meaning of Article 1(5) of Directive 98/34, since it does not relate to an ‘Information society service’, within the meaning of Article 1(2) of that directive. Third, that provision cannot be regarded as falling within the category of ‘other requirements’, within the meaning of Article 1(4) of Directive 98/34, since the authorisation required by that provision of national law for the organisation of games of chance constitutes a condition imposed with respect to the activity of organising such games, and not with respect to the products concerned by prohibiting their use other than in casinos. Last, such a provision cannot be considered to be a technical regulation belonging to the category of prohibitions, since provisions of national law which merely lay down conditions governing the establishment or provision of services by undertakings, such as provisions making the exercise of a business activity subject to prior authorisation, do not constitute technical regulations within the meaning of Article 1(11) of Directive 98/34.

   (see paras 23, 24, 27, 29, 30, 33, operative part)