Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 31 May 2005 in Case C-438/02: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Stockholms tingsrätt in criminal proceedings against Krister Hanner (Articles 28 EC, 31 EC, 43 EC and 86(2) EC — Marketing of medicinal preparations — Establishment of retail traders — National monopoly on the retail of medicinal preparations — Undertaking entrusted with providing a service of general economic interest)
Date: 2005-07-23
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: interpretation of the law, over-the-counter drug, pharmaceutical legislation, retail trade

C 182/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

23.7.2005

2. Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(1) OJ C 19 of 25.01.2003.

(Grand Chamber)

of 7 June 2005

in Case C-17/03: Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the College van Beroep voor het bedrijfsleven Vereniging
voor Energie, Milieu en Water and Others v Directeur van
de Dienst uitvoering en toezicht energie (1)

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Grand Chamber)

of 31 May 2005

in Case C-438/02: Reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Stockholms tingsrätt in criminal proceedings against
Krister Hanner (1)

(Articles 28 EC, 31 EC, 43 EC and 86(2) EC — Marketing of
medicinal preparations — Establishment of retail traders —
National monopoly on the retail of medicinal preparations —
Undertaking entrusted with providing a service of general
economic interest)

(2005/C 182/03)

(Language of the case: Swedish)

In Case C-438/02: reference for a preliminary ruling under
Article 234 EC from the Stockholms tingsrätt (Sweden), made
by decision of 29 November 2002, received at the Court on 4
December 2002,
in criminal proceedings against Krister
Hanner, the Court (Grand Chamber), composed of V. Skouris,
Jann (Rapporteur), C.W.A.
President of
Timmermans and A. Rosas, Presidents of Chambers, J-P. Puisso-
chet, R. Schintgen, N. Colneric, S. von Bahr and J.N. Cunha
Rodrigues, Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; M. Múgica Arza-
mendi, Principal Administrator, for the, Registrar, gave a judg-
ment on 31 May 2005, the operative part of which is as
follows:

the Chamber, P.

Article 31(1) EC precludes a sales regime which grants an exclusive
retail right and is arranged in the same way as the sales regime at
issue in the main proceedings.

(Internal market in electricity — Preferential access to the
system for cross-border transmission of electricity — Under-
taking previously responsible for the operation of services of
general economic interest — Long-term contracts existing
prior
the market — Directive
96/92/EC — Principle of non-discrimination — Principles of
legal
the protection of

to the liberalisation of

expectation and of

legitimate

certainty)

(2005/C 182/04)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

In Case C-17/03: reference for a preliminary ruling under
Article 234 EC from the College van Beroep voor het bedrijf-
sleven (Administrative Court for Trade and Industry) (Nether-
lands), made by decision of 13 November 2002, received at the
Court on 16 January 2003, in the proceedings between Vere-
niging voor Energie, Milieu en Water, Amsterdam Power
Exchange Spotmarket BV, Eneco NV and Directeur van de
intervening party:
Dienst uitvoering en toezicht energie,
Nederlands
BV,
Elektriciteit
previously Samenwerkende Elektriciteits Produktiebedrijven NV
— the Court (Grand Chamber), composed of V. Skouris, Presi-
dent, P. Jann, C.W.A. Timmermans and A. Rosas (Rapporteur),
Presidents of Chambers,
Schintgen,
J.-P.
N. Colneric, S. von Bahr, M.
J. Malenovský and U.
Lõhmus, Judges; C. Stix-Hackl, Advocate General; M.-F. Contet,
Principal Administrator, for the, Registrar, gave a judgment on
7 June 2005, the operative part of which is as follows:

Administratiekantoor

Puissochet, R.

Ilešič,

1. Articles 7(5) and 16 of Directive 96/92/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 1996 concerning
common rules for the internal market in electricity are not limited
to covering technical rules but must be construed as applying to all
discrimination.

2. Those articles preclude national measures that grant an under-
taking preferential capacity for the cross-border transmission of
electricity, whether those measures derive from the system operator,
the controller of system management or the legislature, in the case
where such measures have not been authorised within the frame-
work of the procedure set out in Article 24 of Directive 96/92.

(1) OJ C 31 of 08.02.2003.

(1) OJ C 70 of 2.03.2003.