Judgment;Summary — ECLI:EU:C:2023:239
Date: 2023-03-23
Language of the case: Finnish
Court formation: Tenth Chamber
Subject matter: Free movement of goods;Measures having equivalent effect;Quantitative restrictions
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Finland

Summary C-662/21 – 1 
Case C-662/21 
Summary of the request for a preliminary ruling pursuant to Article 98(1) of 
the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice 
Date lodged: 
4 November 2021 
Referring court: 
Korkein hallinto-oikeus (Finland) 
Date of the decision to refer: 
29 October 2021 
Appellant: 
Booky.fi Oy 
Other party: 
Kansallinen audiovisuaalinen instituutti (KAVI) 
 
Subject matter of the main proceedings 
Request for a preliminary ruling – Article 267 TFEU – Classification and 
labelling of audiovisual programme media – Articles 34 to 36 TFEU – 
Measures having equivalent effect to quantitative restrictions on imports – 
Proportionality – Protection of children from harmful audiovisual 
programme media – Inapplicability of the requirement to a foreign economic 
operator 
Subject matter and legal basis of the request 
The Korkein hallinto-oikeus (Supreme Administrative Court, Finland) is called on 
to decide whether a national authority (Kansallinen audiovisuaalinen instituutti 
(National Audiovisual Institute; ‘KAVI’)) was entitled to oblige Booky.fi Oy to 
add the age rating labels based on the classification under the Finnish Law on 
audiovisual programmes to the product information of audiovisual programme 
media when it offered the latter for purchase in its online store. KAVI takes the 
view that it is not sufficient that the age rating labels in question were affixed only 
EN 
SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING – CASE C-662/21 
 
2  
to the physical audiovisual programme media delivered to the customer on the 
basis of an order. 
The audiovisual programme media marketed by Booky.fi Oy in its online store 
came from other Member States of the European Union and were classified in the 
country of origin and labelled with the age rating of the country of origin. 
Under the Law on audiovisual programmes, the provisions on the classification 
and labelling of audiovisual programme media must be complied with even if 
audiovisual programme media imported from another Member State have already 
been classified and labelled in another Member State. 
The present dispute concerns the questions as to whether the provisions of the 
Law on audiovisual programmes concerning the classification and labelling of 
audiovisual programmes are justified in order to protect children from audiovisual 
programmes that are harmful to their development and whether they are 
proportionate with regard to the objective of protecting children and are therefore 
justified under Article 36 TFEU. 
Questions referred for a preliminary ruling 
1. In the light of Article 36 TFEU, does Article 34 TFEU preclude an 
interpretation of Paragraph 5(1) of the Law on audiovisual programmes 
which requires that audiovisual programme media be classified in 
accordance with the Law on audiovisual programmes, and age rating labels 
based on that classification be added to the product information, already at 
the time when the audiovisual programme media are made available for sale 
in an online store, even though the audiovisual programme media have been 
classified and labelled in another Member State but have not yet been 
delivered to Finland? 
Is it relevant to the assessment of the question that the Law on audiovisual 
programmes contains no provision on exceptions to classification and 
labelling on the ground that it has been ascertained that a purchaser of the 
audiovisual programme media is of full age and that, in the case of 
audiovisual programme media offered in an online store, the 
abovementioned requirement of reclassification and relabelling applies only 
where the programme is offered by entities or traders registered or 
established in Finland or by a person who is a Finnish national or is 
habitually resident in Finland, or if the decision to offer the programme was 
taken in Finland? 
2. If the proportionality of the above requirement of reclassification and 
relabelling requires that an exception may be made to that requirement on 
the ground that it has been ascertained that a purchaser of the audiovisual 
programme media is of full age, is it necessary to require, in the case of a 
sale to persons of full age, that there be absolute certainty as to the fact that 
BOOKY.FI 
 
3 
the purchaser is of full age at the time when the audiovisual programme 
media is ordered and sold, or is it sufficient that the seller of the audiovisual 
programme media endeavours to ascertain that the purchaser is of full age? 
Provisions of European Union law relied on 
Articles 34 to 36 TFEU 
Case-law of the Court of Justice relied on 
Judgment of 18 August 2008, Dynamic Medien (C-244/06, EU:C:2008:85, 
paragraphs 35, 42 and 47 to 48). 
Provisions of national law relied on 
According to Paragraph 1 (in the version of 1209/2020) of the Kuvaohjelmalaki 
(710/2011, Law on audiovisual programmes No 710/2011), the purpose of that 
law is to protect children from audiovisual programmes that are harmful to their 
development. 
According to Paragraph 2(1) (in the version of 1209/2020) of the Law on 
audiovisual programmes, that law applies to the offering and supervision of an 
audiovisual programme in Finland where the programme is offered on television 
or via an on-demand service to which the Laki sähköisen viestinnän palveluista 
(917/2014, Law on electronic communications services No 917/2014) applies. 
That law applies to the offering and supervision of audiovisual programmes on 
other media in Finland where: 
1) the programme is offered by entities or traders registered or established in 
Finland; 
2) the programme is offered by a person who is a Finnish national or is 
permanently resident in Finland; or 
3) the decision to offer the programme was taken in Finland. 
According to point 3 of Paragraph 3 of the Law on audiovisual programmes, for 
the purposes of that law, offering an audiovisual programme means making an 
audiovisual programme available to the public for viewing. According to point 5 
of that paragraph, classification means the assessment, based on the viewing of an 
audiovisual programme, as to whether the audiovisual programme may have a 
harmful effect on the development of a child below a certain age. 
According to Paragraph 5(1) (in the version of 673/2013) of the Law on 
audiovisual programmes, unless otherwise provided for in Paragraphs 9 to 11, an 
audiovisual programme may be offered only if it has been classified in accordance 
SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING – CASE C-662/21 
 
4  
with the provisions of Paragraph 16(1) and a clearly visible indication of the age 
rating and content has been displayed on or in connection with the programme, or 
if it is an audiovisual programme within the meaning of Paragraph 16(3) and a 
clearly visible indication of the age rating and content has been displayed on or in 
connection with the programme. In the case of an audiovisual programme within 
the meaning of Paragraph 16(2), it may be offered only if a clearly visible 
indication of the age rating stating that it is suitable for 18-year-olds and over has 
been displayed on or in connection with the programme. 
According to Paragraph 6(5) of the Law on audiovisual programmes, the provider 
of an audiovisual programme must, when offering programmes, provide 
information on the age limits and on other precautionary measures intended to 
protect children. 
According to Paragraph 9(1) of the Law on audiovisual programmes, it is not 
necessary to classify and label an audiovisual programme where it: 
1) contains content consisting exclusively of educational or cultural material; 
2) contains content consisting exclusively of music or sport or recordings of 
sporting, cultural or devotional events or of similar events or occurrences; 
3) contains content consisting exclusively of handicrafts, well-being, 
discussions, games, fashion, gardening, building, cooking, furnishing and 
decorating, mental exercise, quiz games or similar themes intended for all age 
groups; 
4) contains content consisting exclusively of marketing material for goods and 
services; 
5) contains content consisting exclusively of information about ideological or 
political activities; 
6) contains content consisting exclusively of current affairs; 
7) contains content consisting of live broadcasts. 
According to Paragraph 10 of the Law on audiovisual programmes, it is not 
necessary to classify and label an audiovisual programme where it: 
1) is made available in an online publication within the meaning of the Laki 
sananvapauden käyttämisestä joukkoviestinnässä (460/2003, Law on the exercise 
of freedom of expression in mass communication No 460/2003) and was created 
or acquired in the course of the production of that online publication; 
2) is made available via a service offering programmes created by private 
persons and was created by a private person for the purpose of pursuing a hobby; 
BOOKY.FI 
 
5 
3) is offered in the context of an educational or other cultural activity and was 
created in connection with an educational or other cultural activity; 
4) is a game which is made available via a gaming service the provider of 
which complies with its code of practice which was created for such a service and 
is supervised in accordance with Paragraph 8. 
According to Paragraph 11(1) (in the version of 673/2013) of the Law on 
audiovisual programmes, KAVI may, upon application, grant authorisation for 
audiovisual programmes to be offered without classification and labelling 
pursuant to that law at a special event organised for the purpose of offering 
audiovisual programmes. 
According to Paragraph 15(1) of the Law on audiovisual programmes, an 
audiovisual programme is deemed to be harmful to a child’s development if it is 
likely to have a harmful effect on a child’s development due to its violent or 
sexual content or because it causes distress, or if it is likely to have a harmful 
effect on such development in any other comparable way. 
According to Paragraph 16(1) (in the version of 673/2013) of the Law on 
audiovisual programmes, where an audiovisual programme is harmful to the 
development of a child in the manner referred to in Paragraph 15, it is to be 
classified as being suitable for persons of 7, 12, 16 or 18 years of age, depending 
on its content, and assigned a symbol describing the content of the programme. 
Where a programme is not deemed to be harmful to a child’s development, it is to 
be classified as being suitable for all ages. According to Paragraph 16(2), in the 
case of a programme which is clearly intended for persons aged 18 and over, the 
programme is not to be classified. A programme of such a nature may be offered 
only if a clearly visible indication of the age rating stating that it is suitable for 18-
year-olds and over has been displayed on or in connection with the programme. 
According to Paragraph 16(3), KAVI may approve an age rating and a symbol 
describing the content, which have been issued in the territory of the European 
Union, for a programme for use in Finland in accordance with that law without the 
programme being classified in Finland. 
Succinct presentation of the facts and procedure in the main proceedings 
1 Booky.fi Oy is a trader which is incorporated in Finland and was registered as an 
audiovisual programme provider within the meaning of Paragraph 4 of the Law on 
audiovisual programmes on 12 May 2014. Booky.fi Oy offers audiovisual 
programmes in the form of physical products, that is to say, storage media (DVD, 
Blu-ray), for order and purchase in the online store that it operates at the website 
www.booky.fi. 
2 In an inspection carried out in 2018, KAVI found that Booky.fi Oy’s online store 
was offering consumers audiovisual programme media without the labels 
SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING – CASE C-662/21 
 
6  
regarding the permissible age limit and the content of the audiovisual programme, 
as provided for by the Law on audiovisual programmes. 
3 By administrative decision of 9 July 2018, KAVI ordered Booky.fi Oy to add the 
age rating labels under the Law on audiovisual programmes to the product 
information of the audiovisual programme media offered via its online store. In 
addition, it was also required to provide proof that the audiovisual programme 
media specified in the administrative decision were provided with the age rating 
labels under the Law on audiovisual programmes. 
4 The Helsingin hallinto-oikeus (Administrative Court, Helsinki) dismissed 
Booky.fi Oy’s appeal by decision of 9 December 2019. The Administrative Court 
took the view that, in an online store, the offering to the public of an audiovisual 
programme for delivery by post pursuant to Paragraph 5(1) of the Law on 
audiovisual programmes begins at the time when the audiovisual programme 
medium can be purchased or otherwise ordered in the online store. Therefore, the 
age rating label referred to in that law must be displayed on or in connection with 
the audiovisual programme at that point in time. It is not sufficient that the label is 
displayed on or in connection with the audiovisual programme only when the 
audiovisual programme medium is posted to the customer who placed the order. 
5 According to the Administrative Court’s decision, the provision of Paragraph 5(1) 
of the Law on audiovisual programmes requires that the age rating label under that 
provision also be displayed on or in connection with an audiovisual programme 
medium purchased from an online store at the time when it is received by the 
customer who placed the order. 
The essential arguments of the parties in the main proceedings 
6 In its appeal before the Supreme Administrative Court, Booky.fi Oy submitted that 
the fact that audiovisual programme media sold in its online store, classified in 
another Member State and bearing an age rating label of the Member State in 
question are once again made subject to classification and age rating labelling 
constitutes a measure having equivalent effect to quantitative restrictions on 
imports within the meaning of Article 34 TFEU. According to Booky.fi Oy, the 
classification and labelling provisions of the Law on audiovisual programmes go 
beyond what is necessary to achieve the objective of protecting children in cases 
where the audiovisual programme media are offered exclusively to adult 
purchasers. The prohibition on the sale of unclassified audiovisual programme 
media is a measure which is excessive in relation to the objective pursued. 
7 Booky.fi Oy stated that it has restricted the ordering possibilities in its online store 
to the effect that only consumer customers of full age can place orders in the store. 
Age rating relabelling does not provide any informational value for a person of 
full age who purchases an audiovisual medium if the information regarding the 
fact that the audiovisual medium has not been classified in accordance with the 
BOOKY.FI 
 
7 
Law on audiovisual programmes and that the audiovisual medium is intended to 
be available only to persons of full age has been communicated in another way. 
8 The present dispute differs from that ruled on by the Court in Case C-244/06, 
Dynamic Medien. The German legislation under consideration in that judgment 
did not prohibit all selling arrangements for unclassified audiovisual media, but 
permitted selling arrangements in which it was possible to establish the age of a 
purchaser. 
9 Booky.fi Oy presents the audiovisual programme media in its online store on a 
sales page via which, on the basis of incoming orders, the audiovisual programme 
media are ordered from international wholesalers at the time when the purchaser 
placed the order for the media. That approach makes it possible to offer 
consumers a much wider range of products than in the case of sales made in a 
physical store, as the e-commerce trader does not have to assume the risk of 
storing audiovisual media. Booky.fi Oy offers a product range consisting of 
approximately 150 000 audiovisual programme media titles to its customers in 
Finland and elsewhere in the European Union. 
10 Practically all the audiovisual programme media sold in Finland is imported into 
Finland from other territories of the European Union. The only audiovisual 
programme media that are classified in Finland are those in respect of which the 
rightholder of the media presumes that there is sufficient sales potential in 
Finland. For economic reasons, it is not possible for a retailer to classify 
audiovisual programme media. It is only in rare cases that an individual retailer 
sells audiovisual programme media in such a sufficient quantity as to make 
classification viable. 
11 A foreign provider of audiovisual programme media is permitted to present media 
in its online store and deliver them to a Finnish customer without being obliged to 
comply with the provisions of the Law on audiovisual programmes. By contrast, a 
provider of audiovisual programme media which is established in Finland is not 
permitted to provide information regarding audiovisual programmes on its website 
without the audiovisual programme media being classified in the manner referred 
to in the Law on audiovisual programmes, even though the media have not yet 
been imported into Finland. 
12 The presentation of audiovisual programme media in an online store cannot entail 
an obligation to classify and label it. Such an obligation can arise only at the time 
when the media is delivered to the purchaser. The requirement to classify all 
audiovisual programme media presented in an online store is contrary to the 
principle of proportionality. There would be less of a restriction on the free 
movement of goods if only the media actually imported into Finland were to be 
classified. 
13 KAVI submitted before the Supreme Administrative Court that the Law on 
audiovisual programmes does not prohibit all forms of distribution of all 
SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING – CASE C-662/21 
 
8  
unclassified audiovisual programmes. National age rating and labelling systems 
for audiovisual programmes recorded on storage media are widespread in the 
Member States of the European Union. The national classification practices of 
many Member States differ significantly from the Law on audiovisual 
programmes with regard both to child protection and to children’s freedom of 
expression. If all age limits and content symbols adopted within the territory of the 
EU were to be approved for use in Finland without classification under national 
law, it would not be possible to ensure the attainment of the objectives of the Law 
on audiovisual programmes. 
14 Booky.fi Oy has not explained how it verifies the age of a purchaser of 
audiovisual programme media. Online bank transfers or gift vouchers can also be 
used as means of payment in the online store, and the user of such means may be 
younger than 18 years of age. The age of a purchaser is also not established at the 
time of the payment transaction. 
15 In its reply to the Supreme Administrative Court, Booky.fi Oy stated that it had 
supplemented its terms of delivery to the effect that it is clear from them that it 
does not sell audiovisual programme media to persons under the age of 18. 
According to the terms of delivery, the customer placing an order must declare, 
when placing the order, that he or she is of full age and authorised to order the 
products in question. 
Succinct presentation of the reasoning in the request for a preliminary ruling 
16 Since the provisions on the classification and labelling of audiovisual programme 
media that concern the sale of such media in an online store are not harmonised at 
EU level, the national provisions in question must be examined in the light of 
Articles 34 and 36 TFEU, which concern the free movement of goods. 
17 Under the Law on audiovisual programmes, the offering of audiovisual 
programme media in Finland requires that the audiovisual programmes have been 
classified and labelled in accordance with the provisions of that law. Since 
Booky.fi Oy is incorporated in Finland, it must comply with the Law on 
audiovisual programmes when offering audiovisual programmes in Finland. 
18 According to the Supreme Administrative Court’s current understanding, the 
concept of ‘offering an audiovisual programme’ within the meaning of the Law on 
audiovisual programmes covers the offering of audiovisual programme media for 
order and purchase in an online store. Under the Law on audiovisual programmes, 
an age rating label corresponding to the classification under that law must be 
displayed in connection with the product information even where media are 
offered for sale in an online store. 
19 The national provisions require Booky.fi Oy to classify and label all audiovisual 
programme media offered in its online store in accordance with the Law on 
audiovisual programmes already at the time when they can be ordered and sold in 
BOOKY.FI 
 
9 
the online store. It is not sufficient that it is only before the media are delivered to 
a purchaser resident in Finland that they are classified. That is the case 
irrespective of whether the media have already been classified by a competent 
body in another Member State. 
20 It follows from the judgment in Case C-244/06, Dynamic Medien, that national 
rules on the classification and labelling of audiovisual programme media, such as 
the rules at issue in the present case, constitute a measure having equivalent effect 
to quantitative restrictions within the meaning of Article 34 TFEU, which in 
principle is incompatible with the obligations arising from that article unless it can 
be objectively justified. 
21 In accordance with the judgment in Case C-244/06, the Member State has a 
margin of discretion in assessing the level of protection of children’s rights which 
the rules are intended to ensure. However, in accordance with that judgment, it is 
also necessary that the measures implemented by those rules be suitable for 
securing that objective and do not go beyond what is necessary in order to attain 
it.  
22 The case before the Supreme Administrative Court differs from Case C-244/06 in 
that the Law on audiovisual programmes does not allow for exceptions to the age 
rating labelling requirement even if it has been ascertained that the purchaser is of 
full age. The German legislation at issue in the judgment in that case did not 
prohibit all selling arrangements for unclassified audiovisual media. It was 
permissible to import and sell such audiovisual media to adults by way of 
distribution channels involving personal contact between the supplier and the 
purchaser, which thus ensures that children do not have access to the audiovisual 
media concerned. 
23 The German rules at issue in the judgment in Case C-244/06 also differed from 
the provisions of the Law on audiovisual programmes in that they applied not only 
to sellers of audiovisual media established in the territory of the Member State in 
question but also to sellers established in another Member State. 
24 According to Booky.fi Oy, it is sufficient that the age rating label provided for by 
the Law on audiovisual programmes appears on the audiovisual programme media 
at the time when they are handed over to the purchaser. It submits that 
reclassification of its entire range of products would not be economically viable in 
view of the size of the range and the volume of sales attributable to Finland. 
Booky.fi Oy does not stock its entire sales portfolio, but orders the media from 
international wholesalers on the basis of the ordering or purchase process. 
25 If audiovisual programme media were offered to purchasers in the online store 
with age rating labels according to the classification system of another Member 
State, a purchaser would not be informed, at the time of sale, of the content of the 
audiovisual programme and the age rating label based on that content, in 
accordance with the classification under the Law on audiovisual programmes. In 
SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING – CASE C-662/21 
 
10  
that case, the level of child protection sought at national level would not be 
achieved in that respect. The absence of the age rating label provided for by 
national law would also be problematic from the point of view of consumer 
protection, since the purchaser would not be properly informed of the content of 
the audiovisual programme and its age rating at the time of purchase. 
26 The Law on audiovisual programmes as such does not require all audiovisual 
programmes to be classified. Exemptions of audiovisual programmes from 
classification and labelling are provided for in Paragraph 9 of that law on the basis 
of their content, in Paragraph 10 on the basis of the purpose for which they were 
produced and in Paragraph 11 on the basis of authorisation granted by KAVI. 
According to that law, KAVI may approve an age rating and a symbol describing 
the content, which have been issued in the territory of the European Union, for a 
programme for use in Finland in accordance with the law without the programme 
being classified in Finland. 
27 Under the Law on audiovisual programmes, in the case of a programme which is 
clearly intended for persons aged 18 and over, the programme is not to be 
classified. A programme of such a nature may be offered only if a clearly visible 
indication of the age rating stating that it is suitable for 18-year-olds and over has 
been displayed on or in connection with the programme. That provision relates to 
audiovisual programmes the content of which is intended only for adults (such as 
adult entertainment programmes). 
28 Audiovisual programmes other than those referred to in points 26 and 27 must be 
classified, and the national legislation does not contain a provision on exceptions 
to classification and labelling on the ground that it has been ascertained that a 
purchaser of audiovisual programme media is of full age. In the case before the 
Supreme Administrative Court, it is necessary to assess whether, in the light of 
that circumstance, the rules laid down in the Law on audiovisual programmes can 
be regarded as being proportionate to the objective of child protection. 
29 According to Booky.fi Oy, the audiovisual programme media offered for order 
and sale in its online store can be purchased only by persons of full age and, 
therefore, information on age limits and content is not necessary for the protection 
of children. Booky.fi Oy stated that, according to its terms of delivery, it sells 
audiovisual programme media only to persons of full age and requires, when 
payment is made, the use of payment methods via a payment service provider 
which requires that the person concerned is of full age. 
30 Booky.fi Oy itself endeavours to ascertain that the audiovisual programme media 
which it offers are not sold to persons under the age of 18. However, the Supreme 
Administrative Court takes the view that the measures implemented by Booky.fi 
Oy do not guarantee that minors will not nevertheless be able to order or purchase 
(using gift vouchers, for example), or otherwise gain access to, audiovisual 
programme media that are unsuitable for their development. 
BOOKY.FI 
 
11 
31 As regards audiovisual programme media, the Law on audiovisual programmes 
applies to the offering and monitoring of audiovisual programmes. Therefore, a 
purchaser of audiovisual programme media who is resident in Finland may 
purchase media which are not classified under the Law on audiovisual 
programmes from e-commerce traders established in other Member States or in 
third countries, in so far as that law does not apply. In the case before the Supreme 
Administrative Court, the question arises as to whether the requirement of 
reclassification can effectively achieve the objective of protecting children where, 
in the case of audiovisual programme media offered in an online store, that 
requirement applies only where the programme is offered by entities or traders 
registered or established in Finland or by a person who is a Finnish national or is 
habitually resident in Finland, or if the decision to offer the programme was taken 
in Finland. 
32 The Supreme Administrative Court takes the view that it is open to interpretation 
whether, in a case such as that under consideration in the present dispute, the 
requirement of classification and age rating labelling under the Law on 
audiovisual programmes in any event goes beyond what is necessary for the 
protection of children, taking into account the abovementioned circumstances 
associated with the regulation under the Law on audiovisual programmes. In that 
respect, the case-law of the Court does not contain any express interpretative 
guidance for circumstances such as those in the present case.