Case C-466/05: Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 6 March 2007 — (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Lecce (Italy)) — Criminal proceedings against Gianluca Damonte (First subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure — 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: Italy, freedom to provide services, game of chance, interpretation of the law, right of establishment, sanction (EU)

28.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 96/21

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

in so far as
national
legislation limits the number of operators active in the
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
obtain licences or authorisations because that Member State,
in
breach of Community law, refused to grant licences or authorisa-
tions to such persons.

(1) OJ C 10 of 14.1.2006.

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 6 March 2007 —
(Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di
Lecce (Italy)) — Criminal proceedings against Gianluca
Damonte

(Case C-466/05) (1)

(First subparagraph of Article 104(3) of the Rules of Proce-
dure — 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)

(2007/C 96/36)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Lecce

Criminal proceedings against

Gianluca Damonte

Re:

Operative part of the order

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 freedom to provide services
laid down in Articles 43 EC and 49 EC respectively.

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

in so far as
national
legislation limits the number of operators active in the
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 defendant
in this case 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 obtain
licences or authorisations because that Member State, in breach of
Community law, refused to grant licences or authorisations to such
persons.

(1) OJ C 74 of 25.3.2006.

Order of
the Court of 13 March 2007 — Arizona
Chemical BV, Eastman Belgium BVBA, Cray Valley
Iberica SA, v Commission of the European Communities,
Republic of Finland

(Case C-150/06 P) (1)

(Appeal — Directive 67/548/EEC — Refusal to declassify
rosin as a dangerous substance — Action for annulment —
Act not open to challenge — Breach of the right to an effec-
tive legal remedy — Action for damages — Appeal clearly
unfounded)

(2007/C 96/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunale di Lecce —
Interpretation of Articles 43 EC and 49 EC — National
law
requiring authorisation to be obtained before the activity of
collecting bets can be pursued

Appellants: Arizona Chemical BV, Eastman Belgium BVBA, Cray
Valley Iberica SA (represented by: C. Mereu and K. van
Maldegem, avocats)