Case C-150/06 P: 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 (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 effective legal remedy — Action for damages — Appeal clearly unfounded)
Date: 2007-04-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, General Court (EU), appeal, chemical industry, dangerous substance, labelling

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)

C 96/22

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

28.4.2007

Other parties to the proceedings: Commission of the European
Communities
(represented by: X. Lewis and F. Simonetti,
Agents), Republic of Finland

Parties

Applicant: Ceramika Paradyż sp.z oo

Defendant: Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Łodzi

Re:

of

against

brought

judgment

Appeal
the Court
the
of First Instance (Third Chamber) of 14 December 2005 in Case
T-369/03 Arizona Chemical and Others v Commission,
in
which the Court of First
Instance declared inadmissible an
action for annulment of Commission Decision D(2003)430245
of 20 August 2003, rejecting the applicant's request to withdraw
rosin from the list of dangerous substances set out in Annex I
to Council Directive 67/548/EEC of 27 June 1967 on the
approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provi-
sions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of
dangerous substances (OJ L 196, p. 1)

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Wojewódzki Sąd Adminis-
tracyny w Łodzi (Poland) — Interpretation of the second para-
graph of Article 2 of First Council Directive 67/227/EEC of
11 April 1967 on the harmonisation of legislation of Member
States concerning turnover taxes (OJ 1967 L 71, p. 1301), and
Articles 2, 10(1)(a), 10(2) and 27(1) of Directive 77/388/EEC:
Sixth Council Directive of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation
of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes —
Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assess-
ment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1) — National legislation providing
for the imposition of an additional tax in cases where irregulari-
ties are found in the return submitted by the taxable person

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

Operative part of the order

2. Arizona Chemical BV, Eastman Belgium BVBA and Cray Valley

Iberica SA shall bear the costs.

The Court of Justice of the European Communities has no jurisdiction
to reply to the questions referred by the Wojewódzki Sąd Administra-
cyny w Łodzi.

(1) OJ C 121, 20.5.2006.

(1) OJ C 143, 17.6.2006.

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 6 March 2007
(reference for a preliminary ruling from the Wojewódzki
Sąd Administracyny w Łodzi
(Regional Administrative
Court, Łódź) — Ceramika Paradyż sp.z oo v Dyrektor Izby
Skarbowej w Łodzi

Order of

the Court of 9 March 2007 — Schneider

Electric SA v Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-188/06 P) (1)

(Case C-168/06) (1)

(Appeals — Concentrations between undertakings — Electri-
city distribution market — Decisions to initiate and close
proceedings)

(Article 104(3), first subparagraph, of the Rules of Procedure
— First and Sixth VAT Directives — Facts pre-dating the
accession of the Republic of Poland to the European Union —
Jurisdiction of the Court)

(2007/C 96/39)

Language of the case: French

(2007/C 96/38)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Referring court

Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyny w Łodzi

Applicant: Schneider Electric SA (represented by: A. Winckler,
I. Girgenson and M. Pittie, avocats)

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
the European
Communities (represented by: A. Bouquet and O. Beynet, as
Agents)