This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document C2007/095/04
Joined Cases C-338/04, C-359/04 and C-360/04: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 March 2007 (references for preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Larino, Tribunale di Teramo — Italy) — Criminal proceedings against Massimiliano Placanica (Case C-338/04), Christian Palazzese (Case C-359/04), Angelo Sorricchio (Case C-360/04) (Freedom of establishment — Freedom to provide services — Interpretation of Articles 43 EC and 49 EC — Games of chance — Collection of bets on sporting events — Licensing requirement — Exclusion of certain operators by reason of their type of corporate form — Requirement of police authorisation — Criminal penalties)
Joined Cases C-338/04, C-359/04 and C-360/04: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 March 2007 (references for preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Larino, Tribunale di Teramo — Italy) — Criminal proceedings against Massimiliano Placanica (Case C-338/04), Christian Palazzese (Case C-359/04), Angelo Sorricchio (Case C-360/04) (Freedom of establishment — Freedom to provide services — Interpretation of Articles 43 EC and 49 EC — Games of chance — Collection of bets on sporting events — Licensing requirement — Exclusion of certain operators by reason of their type of corporate form — Requirement of police authorisation — Criminal penalties)
Joined Cases C-338/04, C-359/04 and C-360/04: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 March 2007 (references for preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Larino, Tribunale di Teramo — Italy) — Criminal proceedings against Massimiliano Placanica (Case C-338/04), Christian Palazzese (Case C-359/04), Angelo Sorricchio (Case C-360/04) (Freedom of establishment — Freedom to provide services — Interpretation of Articles 43 EC and 49 EC — Games of chance — Collection of bets on sporting events — Licensing requirement — Exclusion of certain operators by reason of their type of corporate form — Requirement of police authorisation — Criminal penalties)
SL C 95, 28.4.2007, p. 3–3
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
28.4.2007 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 95/3 |
Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 March 2007 (references for preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Larino, Tribunale di Teramo — Italy) — Criminal proceedings against Massimiliano Placanica (Case C-338/04), Christian Palazzese (Case C-359/04), Angelo Sorricchio (Case C-360/04)
(Joined Cases C-338/04, C-359/04 and C-360/04) (1)
(Freedom of establishment - Freedom to provide services - Interpretation of Articles 43 EC and 49 EC - Games of chance - Collection of bets on sporting events - Licensing requirement - Exclusion of certain operators by reason of their type of corporate form - Requirement of police authorisation - Criminal penalties)
(2007/C 95/04)
Language of the case: Italian
Referring court
Tribunale di Larino, Tribunale di Teramo
Parties in the main proceedings
Massimiliano Placanica (Case C-338/04), Christian Palazzese (Case C-359/04), Angelo Sorricchio (Case C-360/04),
Re:
Preliminary ruling — Tribunale di Larino — Interpretation of Article 43 et seq and Article 49 EC and of the judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-243/01 Gambelli and Others — National law which imposes penalties in relation to the organising of the taking of bets, and the collecting of bets, on various events and, in particular, on sporting events — Collection of bets online by an unlicensed betting operator on behalf of a company operating with a licence in another Member State
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
|
1. |
National legislation which prohibits the pursuit of the activities of collecting, taking, booking and forwarding offers of bets, in particular bets on sporting events, without a licence or a police authorisation issued by the Member State concerned, constitutes a restriction on the freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services, provided for in Articles 43 EC and 49 EC respectively. |
|
2. |
It is for the national courts to determine whether, in so far as national legislation limits the number of operators active in the betting and gaming sector, it genuinely contributes to the objective of preventing the exploitation of activities in that sector for criminal or fraudulent purposes. |
|
3. |
Articles 43 EC and 49 EC must be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which excludes — and, moreover, continues to exclude — from the betting and gaming sector operators in the form of companies whose shares are quoted on the regulated markets. |
|
4. |
Articles 43 EC and 49 EC must be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which imposes a criminal penalty on persons such as the defendants in the main proceedings for pursuing the organised activity of collecting bets without a licence or a police authorisation as required under the national legislation, where those persons were unable to obtain licences or authorisations because that Member State, in breach of Community law, refused to grant licences or authorisations to such persons. |