Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2002:327
Date: 2002-06-04
Language of the case: French
Court formation: Full Court
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Right of establishment;Free movement of capital
Concepts: Free movement of capital and freedom of payments
Procedure: Action for failure to fulfil obligations - successful
Origin: France

Summary of the Judgment 
1. Free movement of capital — Restrictions — Obstacles resulting from privileges 
retained by Member States in the management of privatised undertakings — 
Justification — Systems of property ownership — None 
(Arts 56 EC and 295 EC) 
I - 4781 
SUMMARY — CASE C-483/99 
2. Free movement of capital — Restrictions — National rules vesting in the State a 
'golden share' in a company — Power to grant prior authorisation where certain limits 
on shareholdings are exceeded and right to oppose the transfer or use as security of the 
capital of the company — Not permissible — Justification on grounds of public 
security — None 
(Arts 56 EC and 58(1)(b) EC) 
1. Depending on the circumstances, cer­
tain concerns may justify the retention 
by Member States of a degree of 
influence within undertakings that 
were initially public and subsequently 
privatised, where those undertakings 
are active in fields involving the provi­
sion of services in the public interest or 
strategic services. However, those con­
cerns cannot entitle Member States to 
plead their own systems of property 
ownership, as referred to in Article 295 
EC, by way of justification for 
obstacles, resulting from privileges 
attaching to their position as share­
holder in a privatised undertaking, to 
the exercise of the freedoms provided 
for by the Treaty, such as the free 
movement of capital between Member 
States. That article does not have the 
effect of exempting the Member States' 
systems of property ownership from 
the fundamental rules of the Treaty. 
(see paras 43-44) 
2. A Member State which maintains in 
force national rules vesting in that State 
a 'golden share' in an oil company, 
according to which the following rights 
attach to that 'golden share': 
— a right of prior authorisation by the 
State where certain ceilings in 
respect of shareholdings or voting 
rights are exceeded; 
— a right to oppose any decision to 
transfer or use as security the 
majority of the capital of various 
subsidiaries of the company, 
fails to comply with its obligations 
under Article 56 EC. 
Such rules constitute a restriction on 
the movement of capital within the 
meaning of that article which cannot 
be justified. Although, in that regard, 
the objective of safeguarding supplies 
of petroleum products in the event of a 
crisis falls within the ambit of public-
I - 4782 
COMMISSION v FRANCE 
security considerations which may jus­
tify an obstacle to the free movement of 
c a p i t a l , in a c c o r d a n c e wi th 
Article 58(1)(b) EC, such rules go 
beyond what is necessary in order to 
attain that objective, since the structure 
of the system established does not 
include any precise, objective criteria. 
(see paras 42, 47, 53, operative part 1) 
I - 4783