Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62001CJ0243

Povzetek sodbe

Keywords
Summary

Keywords

Freedom of establishment — Freedom to provide services — Restrictions — National legislation prohibiting, on pain of criminal penalty, the collection of bets without a licence or authorisation — Not permissible — Justification in the public interest — Compliance with the principles of proportionality and non-discrimination — Investigation by the national courts — (Arts 43 EC and 49 EC)

Summary

National legislation which prohibits on pain of criminal penalties the pursuit of the activities of collecting, taking, booking and forwarding offers of bets, in particular on sporting events, without a licence or authorisation from the Member State concerned constitutes a restriction on freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services provided for in Articles 43 EC and 49 EC respectively, which, to be justified, must be based on imperative requirements in the general interest, be suitable for achieving the objective which they pursue and not go beyond what is necessary in order to attain it and be applied without discrimination.

In that connection, it is for the national court to determine whether such legislation, taking account of the detailed rules for its application, actually serves the aims which might justify it, and whether the restrictions it imposes are disproportionate in the light of those objectives.

In particular, in so far as the authorities of a Member State incite and encourage consumers to participate in lotteries, games of chance and betting to the financial benefit of the public purse, the authorities of that State cannot invoke public order concerns relating to the need to reduce opportunities for betting in order to justify measures such as those at issue in the main proceedings. Furthermore, where a criminal penalty was imposed on any person who from his home in a Member State connects by internet to a bookmaker established in another Member State the national court must consider whether this constitutes a disproportionate penalty.

see paras 65, 69, 72, 76, operative part

Top