# C_2010346EN.01001201.xml

| 18.12.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 346/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.12.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 346/12

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 21 October 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Simvoulio tis Epikratias (Greece)) — Idrima Tipou AE v Ipourgos Tipou kai Meson Mazikis Enimerosis

(Case C-81/09) (1)

1

(Freedom of establishment - Free movement of capital - Company law - First Directive 68/151/EEC - Public limited company in the press and television sector - Company and shareholder holding more than 2,5 % of the shares - Administrative fine imposed jointly and severally)

2010/C 346/19

Language of the case: Greek

Referring court

Referring court

Simvoulio tis Epikratias

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Idrima Tipou AE

Applicant:

Defendant: Ipourgos Tipou kai Meson Mazikis Enimerosis

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Simvoulio tis Epikratias — Interpretation of Article 1 of First Council Directive 68/151/EEC of 9 March 1968 on co-ordination of safeguards which, for the protection of the interests of members and others, are required by Member States of companies within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 58 of the Treaty, with a view to making such safeguards equivalent throughout the Community (OJ, English Special Edition 1968 (I), p. 41) — National provision establishing joint and several liability of a public limited company in the press and television sector and its shareholders holding more than 2.5% of its share capital for payment of administrative fines imposed as a result of such a company’s activities

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | First Council Directive 68/151/EEC of 9 March 1968 on co-ordination of safeguards which, for the protection of the interests of members and others, are required by Member States of companies within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 58 of the Treaty, with a view to making such safeguards equivalent throughout the Community, must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation such as Article 4(3) of Law No 2328/1995 ‘Legal regime governing private television and local radio, regulation of issues relating to the broadcasting market and other provisions’, as amended by Law No 2644/1998 ‘on the provision of subscription radio and television services’, according to which the fines provided for in the preceding paragraphs of that article for infringement of the legislation and rules of good conduct governing the operation of television stations are imposed jointly and severally, not only on the company which holds the licence to found and operate the television station but also on all shareholders with a holding of over 2,5 %. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First Council Directive 68/151/EEC of 9 March 1968 on co-ordination of safeguards which, for the protection of the interests of members and others, are required by Member States of companies within the meaning of the second paragraph of Article 58 of the Treaty, with a view to making such safeguards equivalent throughout the Community, must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation such as Article 4(3) of Law No 2328/1995 ‘Legal regime governing private television and local radio, regulation of issues relating to the broadcasting market and other provisions’, as amended by Law No 2644/1998 ‘on the provision of subscription radio and television services’, according to which the fines provided for in the preceding paragraphs of that article for infringement of the legislation and rules of good conduct governing the operation of television stations are imposed jointly and severally, not only on the company which holds the licence to found and operate the television station but also on all shareholders with a holding of over 2,5 %.

| 2. | Articles 49 TFEU and 63 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding such national legislation. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Articles 49 TFEU and 63 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding such national legislation.

---

(1)  OJ C 102, 1.5.2009.

1

---