Case C-203/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 16 May 2008 — The Sporting Exchange Ltd, trading under the name Betfair ; other parties: Minister for Justice, Stichting de Nationale Sporttotalisator and Scientific Games Racing
Date: 2008-05-16
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Internet, freedom to provide services, game of chance, interpretation of the law

2.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 197/11

Questions referred

that

1. Is Article 4(1) of Council Directive 87/344/EC of 22 June
1987 on the coordination of laws, regulations and adminis-
trative provisions relating to legal expenses insurance (1) to
be interpreted to the effect
it precludes a clause,
contained in the standard terms and conditions of insurance
in
of a legal expenses insurer, which entitles the insurer,
respect of insurance claims concerning losses suffered by a
large number of insured persons as a result of the same
event (for example the insolvency of an investment services
undertaking),
to select a legal representative and which
thereby restricts the right of the individual insured person to
choose his own lawyer (so-called ‘mass torts clause’)?

2. If the first question is answered in the negative:

What are the requirements for the existence of a ‘mass tort’
which, in accordance with (or as a complement to) Directive
87/344/EEC, confers on the insurer instead of the insured
person the right to select the legal representative?

(1) OJ 1987 L 185, p. 77.

licence has already been granted in another Member State to
provide those services via the internet from also offering
those services via the internet in the first Member State?

2. Is the interpretation which the Court of Justice has given to
Article 49 EC, and in particular to the principle of equality
and the duty of transparency arising therefrom, in a number
of individual cases concerning concessions applicable to the
procedure for the granting of a licence to offer services
relating to games of chance under a statutorily established
single-licence system?

3.

(a). Under a statutorily established single-licence system, can
the existing licence-
the extension of
the licence of
holder, without potential applicants being given an
opportunity to compete for that licence, be a suitable
and proportionate means of meeting the imperative
requirements in the general interest which the Court of
Justice has recognised as justifying restriction of
the
freedom to provide services in respect of games of
chance? If so, under what conditions?

(b). Does it make a difference to the answer to Question 3(a)
whether Question 2 is answered in the affirmative or
the negative?

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State
(Netherlands) lodged on 16 May 2008 — The Sporting
Exchange
‘Betfair’;
other parties: Minister for Justice, Stichting de Nationale
Sporttotalisator and Scientific Games Racing

trading

under

name

Ltd,

the

(Case C-203/08)

(2008/C 197/17)

Language of the case: Dutch

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundes-
gerichtshof (Germany) lodged on 19 May 2008 — Peter
Rehder v Air Baltic Corporation

(Case C-204/08)

(2008/C 197/18)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Raad van State

Referring court

Bundesgerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: The Sporting Exchange Ltd, trading under the name
‘Betfair’

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Peter Rehder

Defendant: Air Baltic Corporation

Other parties: Minister for Justice, Stichting de Nationale Sportto-
talisator and Scientific Games Racing

Questions referred

Questions referred

1. Should Article 49 EC be interpreted as meaning that, where
a closed licensing system is applied in a Member State to the
provision of services relating to games of chance, the applica-
tion of that article precludes the competent authority of that
Member State from prohibiting a service provider to whom a

1. Is the second indent of Article 5(1)(b) of Council Regulation
(EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and
the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and
commercial matters (1) to be interpreted as meaning that in
journeys by air from one Member State to
the case of
another the single place of performance for all contractual
obligations must be taken to be the place of the main provi-
sion of services, determined according to economic criteria?