Case C-46/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Schleswig-Holsteinisches Verwaltungsgericht (Germany) lodged on 30 January 2008 — Carmen Media Group Ltd v Land Schleswig-Holstein and Minister for the Interior for the Land Schleswig-Holstein
Date: 2008-02-08
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Internet, State monopoly, freedom to provide services, game of chance, interpretation of the law, national law

24.5.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 128/17

Order of the Court of 19 February 2008 — Tokai Europe
GmbH v Commission of the European Communities

(Case C-262/07) (1)

(Appeal — Regulation (EC) No 384/2004 — Classification of
certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature — Appeal in
in part manifestly
part manifestly

inadmissible

and

unfounded)

(2008/C 128/28)

Language of the case: German

a

for

preliminary

from the
Reference
Schleswig-Holsteinisches Verwaltungsgericht
(Germany)
lodged on 30 January 2008 — Carmen Media Group Ltd v
Land Schleswig-Holstein and Minister for the Interior for
the Land Schleswig-Holstein

ruling

(Case C-46/08)

(2008/C 128/29)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Schleswig-Holsteinisches Verwaltungsgericht

Parties

Appellant: Tokai Europe GmbH (represented by: G. Kroemer,
Rechtsanwalt)

Parties to the main proceedings

the European
Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
Communities (represented by: S. Schønberg and B. Schima,
acting as Agents)

Applicant: Carmen Media Group Ltd

Defendants: Land Schleswig-Holstein and Minister for the Interior
for the Land Schleswig-Holstein

Re:

Questions referred

Appeal against the order of the Court of First Instance (Fourth
Chamber) of 19 March 2007 in Case T-183/04 Tokai Europe v
Commission, by which the Court dismissed as inadmissible an
action for
of Commission Regulation (EC)
No 384/2004 of 1 March 2004 concerning the classification of
certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature (OJ 2004 L 64,
p. 21) — Requirement to be individually concerned by the
contested regulation — Right to a fair hearing

annulment

Operative part of the order

1. The appeal is dismissed.

1. Is Article 49 EC to be interpreted as meaning that reliance
on the freedom to provide services requires that a service
provider be permitted, in accordance with the provisions of
the Member State in which it is established, to provide that
service there as well — in the present case, restriction of the
Gibraltar gambling licence to ‘offshore bookmaking’?

2. Is Article 49 EC to be interpreted as precluding a national
monopoly on the operation of sports betting and lotteries
(with more than a low potential risk of addiction), justified
primarily on the grounds of combating the risk of gambling
addiction, whereas other games of chance, with considerable
potential risk of addiction, may be provided in that Member
State by private service providers, and the different legal rules
for sports betting and lotteries, on the one hand, and other
games of chance, on the other, are based on the differing
legislative powers of the Bund and the Länder?

2. Tokai Europe GmbH is ordered to pay the costs.

If question (2) is answered in the affirmative:

(1) OJ C 170, 21.7.2007.

3. Is Article 49 EC to be interpreted as precluding national
rules which make entitlement to the grant of a licence to
operate and arrange games of chance subject to the discre-
tion of the competent licensing authority, even where the
conditions for the grant of a licence as laid down in the legis-
lation have been fulfilled?

C 128/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

24.5.2008

4. Is Article 49 EC to be interpreted as precluding national
rules prohibiting the operation and brokering of public
games of chance on the internet, in particular where, at the
same time, although only for a transitional period of one
year,
their online operation and brokering is permitted,
subject to legislation protecting minors and players, for the
purposes of the principle of proportionality and to enable
two commercial gambling brokers who have previously oper-
ated exclusively online to switch over to those distribution
channels permitted by the Staatsvertrag?

to the Commission,
the tasks entrusted to notaries under
Belgian law are so distantly connected to the exercise of public
authority that they do not fall within the scope of that article or
the freedom of establishment.
warrant such a restriction of
Those tasks, in fact, do not confer on notaries a power of coer-
cion and less restrictive measures than a nationality requirement
could be laid down by the national
such as
subjecting the operators concerned to strict conditions for
access to the profession, specific professional duties and/or a
specific test.

legislature,

Action brought on 11 February 2008 — Commission of
the European Communities v Kingdom of Belgium

(Case C-47/08)

(2008/C 128/30)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: J.-P. Keppenne and H. Støvlbæk, agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Belgium

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

— declare that, by laying down a nationality requirement for
access to the profession of notary and by failing to transpose
Council Directive 89/48/EEC (1) in respect of the occupation
of notary, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its
obligations under the EC Treaty,
in particular Articles 43
and 45 EC, and Directive 89/48/EEC on a general system for
the recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on
completion of professional education and training of at least
three years' duration;

— order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

By its second complaint, the Commission further alleges that
the defendant failed to fulfil its obligations by failing to trans-
pose Directive 89/48/EEC in respect of the profession of notary.
As it is a regulated profession, the directive is fully applicable to
that profession and the high level of qualification required of
notaries could easily be guaranteed by an aptitude test or an
adaptation period.

(1) Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 on a general
system for the recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on
completion of professional education and training of at least three
years duration (OJ 1989 L 19, p. 16).

Action brought on 12 February 2008 — Commission of
the European Communities v French Republic

(Case C-50/08)

(2008/C 128/31)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: J.-P. Keppenne and M H. Støvlbæk, Agents)

Defendant: French Republic

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

By its action, the Commission first of all alleges that the defen-
dant, by laying down a nationality requirement for access to the
profession of notary and its practice, disproportionately restricts
freedom of establishment as laid down in Article 43 EC. Admit-
tedly, Article 45 EC exempts from the application of the chapter
relating to the right of establishment activities connected directly
and specifically with the exercise of public authority. According

— declare that, by laying down a nationality requirement for
access to the profession of notary, the French Republic has
failed to fulfil its obligations under the EC Treaty, in particu-
lar Articles 43 EC and 45 EC;

— order the French Republic to pay the costs.