Joined Cases C-338/04, C-359/04 and C-360/04: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 March 2007 (references for preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Larino, Tribunale di Teramo — Italy) — Criminal proceedings against Massimiliano Placanica (Case C-338/04), Christian Palazzese (Case C-359/04), Angelo Sorricchio (Case C-360/04) (Freedom of establishment — Freedom to provide services — Interpretation of Articles 43 EC and 49 EC — Games of chance — Collection of bets on sporting events — Licensing requirement — Exclusion of certain operators by reason of their type of corporate form — Requirement of police authorisation — Criminal penalties)
Date: 2007-04-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: award of contract, derogation from EU law, freedom to provide services, interpretation of the law, public contract, right of establishment

28.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/3

Re:

Parties in the main proceedings

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht Köln —
Interpretation of Articles 56 EC and 58 EC — Income-tax rules
providing for a ‘tax credit’ for dividends distributed by national
companies but not
for dividends distributed by companies
which have their seat in another Member State

Massimiliano Placanica (Case C-338/04), Christian Palazzese
(Case C-359/04), Angelo Sorricchio (Case C-360/04),

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 56 EC and 58 EC are to be interpreted as precluding tax
legislation under which, on a distribution of dividends by a capital
company, a shareholder who is fully taxable in a Member State is
entitled to a tax credit, calculated by reference to the corporation tax
rate on the distributed profits, if the dividend-paying company is estab-
lished in that same Member State but not if
it is established in
another Member State.

(1) OJ C 228, 11.9.2004.

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 6 March 2007
(references for preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di
Larino, Tribunale di Teramo — Italy) — Criminal proceed-
ings against Massimiliano Placanica (Case C-338/04), Chris-
tian Palazzese (Case C-359/04), Angelo Sorricchio (Case
C-360/04)

(Joined Cases C-338/04, C-359/04 and C-360/04) (1)

(Freedom of establishment — Freedom to provide services —
Interpretation of Articles 43 EC and 49 EC — Games of
chance — Collection of bets on sporting events — Licensing
requirement — Exclusion of certain operators by reason of
their type of corporate form — Requirement of police authori-
sation — Criminal penalties)

(2007/C 95/04)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Larino, Tribunale di Teramo

Re:

Preliminary ruling — Tribunale di Larino — Interpretation of
Article 43 et seq and Article 49 EC and of the judgment of the
Court of
Justice in Case C-243/01 Gambelli and Others —
National law which imposes penalties in relation to the orga-
nising of the taking of bets, and the collecting of bets, on
various events and, in particular, on sporting events — Collec-
tion of bets online by an unlicensed betting operator on behalf
of a company operating with a licence in another Member State

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. National legislation which prohibits the pursuit of the activities of
collecting, taking, booking and forwarding offers of bets, in particu-
lar bets on sporting events, without a licence or a police authorisa-
tion issued by the Member State concerned, constitutes a restriction
on the freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services,
provided for in Articles 43 EC and 49 EC respectively.

2. It is for the national courts to determine whether,

in so far as
legislation limits the number of operators active in the
national
betting and gaming sector, it genuinely contributes to the objective
of preventing the exploitation of activities in that sector for criminal
or fraudulent purposes.

3. Articles 43 EC and 49 EC must be interpreted as precluding
national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings,
which excludes — and, moreover, continues to exclude — from the
betting and gaming sector operators in the form of companies
whose shares are quoted on the regulated markets.

4. Articles 43 EC and 49 EC must be interpreted as precluding
national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings,
which imposes a criminal penalty on persons such as the defendants
in the main proceedings for pursuing the organised activity of
collecting bets without a licence or a police authorisation as required
under the national legislation, where those persons were unable to
in
obtain licences or authorisations because that Member State,
breach of Community law, refused to grant licences or authorisa-
tions to such persons.

(1) OJ C 273, 6.11.2004.

OJ C 262, 23.10.2004.