This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62019CN0311
Case C-311/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud (Czech Republic) lodged on 16 April 2019 — BONVER WIN, a. s. v Ministerstvo financí
Case C-311/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud (Czech Republic) lodged on 16 April 2019 — BONVER WIN, a. s. v Ministerstvo financí
Case C-311/19: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud (Czech Republic) lodged on 16 April 2019 — BONVER WIN, a. s. v Ministerstvo financí
IO C 213, 24.6.2019, p. 19–19
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
24.6.2019 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 213/19 |
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud (Czech Republic) lodged on 16 April 2019 — BONVER WIN, a. s. v Ministerstvo financí
(Case C-311/19)
(2019/C 213/18)
Language of the case: Czech
Referring court
Nejvyšší správní soud
Parties to the main proceedings
Appellant: BONVER WIN, a. s.
Respondent: Ministerstvo financí
Questions referred
1. |
Does Article 56 et seq. of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union apply to national legislation (a binding measure of general application in the form of a municipal decree) prohibiting a certain service in part of one municipality, simply because some of the customers of a service provider affected by that legislation may come or do come from another Member State of the European Union? If so, is a mere assertion of the possible presence of customers from another Member State sufficient to trigger the applicability of Article 56 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, or is the service provider obliged to prove the actual provision of services to customers who come from other Member States? |
2. |
Is it of any relevance to the answer to the first question that:
|