WRITTEN QUESTION E-1691/00 by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Commission's examination of ban on Swedish professional boxing.
Date: 2000-05-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Sweden, free movement of workers, infringement of EU law, professional sport

6.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 72 E/101

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(4 July 2000)

In 1999 the company Lear Corporation decided to leave the town of Bengtsfors in the region of Dalsland
in Sweden. As the company was an important employer in the region, the Swedish government in a press
release dated 29 March 1999 offered to grant an employment aid of up to SEK 60 million (about € 7,2
million). The aid was to be granted under ordinance 1998:996 on employment grants, which was
approved by the Commission on 18 June 1997 (1).

The potential recipient company, Nisch Produkter, produces special motor vehicles for passenger transport.
Under Section 2.2 of the Community framework for state aid in the motor vehicle sector (2), all aid granted
under an approved aid scheme has to be notified separately, if the nominal amount of the investment
project (total cost of the project) is more than € 50 million or if the total gross aid granted for the project
is more than € 5 million. Consequently, if Nisch Produkter belongs to the motor vehicle sector, an aid of
about € 7,2 million has to be notified to the Commission.

The Swedish authorities have informed the Commission that as of 5 June 2000 the company has not
requested any aid. They expect the eventual request to concern an amount, which is lower than the
amount mentioned in the press release. If the thresholds mentioned above are still exceeded, and if it is
concluded that the recipient company belongs to the motor vehicle sector, the aid will have to be notified
to the Commission.

(1) State aid No E 23/95, letter to the Member State SG(97) D/4397.
(2) OJ C 279, 15.9.1997.

(2001/C 72 E/123)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1691/00

by Jonas Sj(cid:246)stedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(29 May 2000)

Subject: Commission(cid:146)s examination of ban on Swedish professional boxing

Has the Commission examined the question of the ban on professional boxing in Sweden? Is it a breach of
the internal market rules on freedom of movement?

Answer by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(5 July 2000)

The Commission would like to inform the honourable Member that it has had occasion to study the
compatibility of
the freedom of
the ban on professional boxing in Sweden with the principle of
establishment enshrined in Article 43 (ex Article 52) of the EC Treaty, which is a fundamental freedom
for ensuring free movement within the internal market.

In accordance with this principle, in fact, nationals of the Member States can pursue professional activities
as self-employed persons under the conditions laid down for its own nationals by the law of the country
where establishment is effected.

In this connection, it is important to stress that in the absence of specific Community rules governing a
specific activity each Member State is free to organise the pursuit of a professional activity in its territory
(see, in particular, the Court of Justice judgment of 2 July 1984, Case 107/83, Ordre des Avocats au
Barreau de Paris versus Klopp (1984)ECR2971).

According to the information available to the Commission, professional boxing in Sweden is not allowed
by virtue of a law of 1 January 1970. This ban applies generally, both to Swedish nationals and to
nationals of other Member States. A ban of this kind cannot therefore be regarded as contrary to the
principle of the freedom of establishment.