Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:1997:233
Date: 1997-05-13
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: State aids;Competition
Procedure: Action for annulment;Appeal - unfounded
Origin: Belgium

Summary of the J u d g m e n t 
State aid — Definition — Financial conditions, determined by the public authorities, governing 
the assistance given in collecting bets by the body operating betting on horse-races in one Mem­
ber State to the equivalent body in another Member State — No advantage for the beneficiary 
— Excluded 
(EC Treaty, Art. 92(1)) 
A measure cannot be classified as State aid 
within the meaning of Article 92(1) of the 
Treaty if it procures no advantage for its sup­
posed beneficiary. 
Since bets on Belgian races are not identical 
to bets on French races, the existence of an 
advantage for the purposes of Article 92(1) 
of the Treaty cannot be deduced automati­
cally from the difference of treatment to 
which they are subject. 
I - 7007 
SUMMARY — CASE C-353/95 P 
In totalizator betting the stakes constitute a 
common pool which, after various levies, is 
distributed amongst the winners equally, 
whatever the origin of the bets. The share of 
the stakes paid out to the winners thus can­
not vary according to the State in which the 
bets were placed. The proper functioning of 
such a system can therefore be ensured only 
if the rate of any levies which may be 
imposed on the bets laid on a horse-race is 
that of the State in which the race is run. 
Furthermore, where the system of statutory 
and fiscal retentions on bets on horse-races 
organized in one Member State was adopted 
in the light of the specific regulatory and 
economic conditions prevailing with regard 
to horse-racing and totalizator betting in that 
State, there can be no requirement to trans­
pose that system to totalizator betting on 
horse-races run in another Member State, 
which are organized under different regula­
tory and economic conditions. 
I - 7008