Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:1999:435
Date: 1999-09-21
Language of the case: Finnish
Court formation: Full Court
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Free movement of goods;Measures having equivalent effect;Quantitative restrictions;Freedom to provide services
Concepts: The various services
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Finland

Summary of the Judgment 
Freedom to provide services — Restrictions — National legislation reserving the 
operation of slot machines to a public body — Justification — Consumer protection 
and maintenance of order in society 
(EC Treaty, Art. 59 (now, after amendment, Art. 49 EC)) 
I - 6067 
SUMMARY — CASE C-124/97 
National legislation which grants to a 
single public body exclusive rights to oper­
ate slot machines in the national terri­
tory — and which thus directly or indir­
ectly prevents operators in other Member 
States from themselves making slot 
machines available to the public with a 
view to their use in return for payment — 
constitutes an impediment to freedom to 
provide services, even if it applies without 
distinction. 
However, in so far as such legislation 
involves no discrimination on grounds of 
nationality, that impediment may be justi­
fied on grounds relating to the protection of 
consumers and the maintenance of order in 
society. Although that legislation does not 
prohibit the use of slot machines but 
reserves the running of them to a licensed 
public body, the power to determine the 
extent of the protection to be afforded by a 
Member State on its territory with regard 
to lotteries and other forms of gambling 
forms part of the national authorities' 
power of assessment. It is for those autho­
rities, therefore, to assess whether it is 
necessary, in the context of the aim pur­
sued, totally or partially to prohibit activ­
ities of that kind or merely to restrict them 
and, to that end, to establish control 
mechanisms, which may be more or less 
strict. In those circumstances, the mere fact 
that a Member State has opted for a system 
of protection which differs from that 
adopted by another Member State cannot 
affect the assessment of the need for, and 
proportionality of, the provisions enacted 
to that end. Those provisions must be 
assessed solely by reference to the objec­
tives pursued by the national authorities of 
the Member State concerned and the level 
of protection which they are intended to 
provide. 
I - 6068