This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62016CO0141
Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 20 July 2016.
Stanleybet Malta Ltd and Mario Stoppani v Agenzia delle dogane e dei Monopoli – Ufficio dei Monopoli per la Lombardia.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services — Single tax on betting and pools — Making subject to taxation national intermediaries which transmit game data on behalf of operators established in another Member State — Absence of sufficient information concerning the factual and regulatory background to the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for an answer to the question referred for a preliminary ruling — Manifest inadmissibility).
Case C-141/16.
Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 20 July 2016.
Stanleybet Malta Ltd and Mario Stoppani v Agenzia delle dogane e dei Monopoli – Ufficio dei Monopoli per la Lombardia.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services — Single tax on betting and pools — Making subject to taxation national intermediaries which transmit game data on behalf of operators established in another Member State — Absence of sufficient information concerning the factual and regulatory background to the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for an answer to the question referred for a preliminary ruling — Manifest inadmissibility).
Case C-141/16.
Court reports – general – 'Information on unpublished decisions' section
Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 20 July 2016 –
Stanleybet Malta and Stoppani
(Case C‑141/16) ( *1 )
‛Reference for a preliminary ruling — Freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services — Single tax on betting and pools — Making subject to taxation national intermediaries which transmit game data on behalf of operators established in another Member State — Absence of sufficient information concerning the factual and regulatory background to the dispute in the main proceedings and the reasons justifying the need for an answer to the question referred for a preliminary ruling — Manifest inadmissibility)’
Questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Admissibility — Reference giving no details of the relevant facts or legislation and not setting out the reasons for making that reference to the Court of Justice — Manifest inadmissibility (Art. 267 TFEU; Statute of the Court of Justice, Art. 23; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Arts 53(2) and 94) (see paras 6, 7, 10)
Operative part
The request for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione tributaria regionale di Milano (Regional Tax Court, Milan, Italy), by decision of 29 September 2015, is manifestly inadmissible.
( *1 ) OJ C 191, 30.5.2016.