Case C-212/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État (France) lodged on 21 May 2008 — Société Zeturf Limited v Premier ministre, Ministre de l'Agriculture et de la Pêche, Ministre de l'Intérieur, de l'Outre-mer et des Collectivités territoriales, Ministre de l'Économie, de l'Industrie et de l'Emploi — Intervening party: G.I.E. Pari Mutuel Urbain (PMU)
Date: 2008-05-21
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, Internet, competition law, equidae, freedom to provide services, game of chance, interpretation of the law

C 197/12

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

2.8.2008

2. Where a single place of performance is to be determined:
What criteria are relevant for its determination; is the single
place of performance determined, in particular, by the place
of departure or the place of arrival?

(1) OJ 2001 L 12, p. 1.

Action brought on 20 May 2008 — Commission of the
European Communities v Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-211/08)

(2008/C 197/19)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: E. Traversa and R. Vidal Puig, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain

Form of order sought

— declare that, by refusing persons entitled under the Spanish
Sistema Nacional de Salud (National health system) reimbur-
sement of medical costs incurred by them in another
Member State in the event of hospital treatment received in
accordance with Article 22(1)(a)(i) of Council Regulation
(EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of
social
to self-
employed persons and to members of their families moving
within the Community (1) (‘Regulation 1408/71’), in so far
as the level of cover applicable in the Member State in
which that treatment is given is lower than that provided for
in Spanish legislation, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to
fulfil its obligations under Article 49 of the Treaty;

to employed persons,

security schemes

2. When the level of cover of hospital costs applicable under
the rules of another Member State is less favourable than
that provided under Spanish legislation, the refusal of the
Spanish authorities to reimburse the difference may dissuade
persons entitled under the Sistema Nacional de Salud to
move to that Member State in order to receive non-medical
services (for example, educational or tourist services) or, in
the case of persons entitled who have already moved, induce
them to return sooner in order to receive free hospital treat-
ment in Spain. The Spanish provision at issue may therefore
restrict both the provision of those various medical services
which initially motivate the temporary move of a person
entitled to another Member State, and the subsequent provi-
sion of medical services in that Member State in accordance
with Article 22(1)(a)(i) of Regulation 1408/71.

3. Those restrictions on the freedom to provide services are not
justified under the Treaty. In particular, the Spanish authori-
ties have not proved that those restrictions are necessary to
avoid seriously undermining the financial balance of
the
Spanish Sistema Nacional de Salud. Accordingly, the provi-
sion at issue infringes Article 49 EC.

(1) OJ L 149, 5.7.1971, p. 2.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État
(France) lodged on 21 May 2008 — Société Zeturf Limited
v Premier ministre, Ministre de l'Agriculture et de la Pêche,
Ministre de l'Intérieur, de l'Outre-mer et des Collectivités
territoriales, Ministre de l'Économie, de l'Industrie et de
l'Emploi — Intervening party: G.I.E. Pari Mutuel Urbain
(PMU)

(Case C-212/08)

(2008/C 197/20)

Language of the case: French

— order the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

Referring court

Pleas in law and main arguments

Conseil d'État

1. Spanish legislation on social security matters provides that
hospital benefits covered by the Sistema Nacional de Salud
must be provided by its own system, except in very excep-
tional cases of ‘urgent, immediate health assistance which is
essential’. As a result, when a person entitled under the
Spanish Sistema Nacional de Salud moves temporarily to
another Member State and, during that stay, receives assis-
tance in hospital which is necessary from the medical point
of view in accordance with Article 22(1)(a)(i) of Regulation
1408/71, the costs incurred by him are not reimbursed by
the Spanish authorities.

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Société Zeturf Limited

Defendants: Premier ministre, Ministre de l'Agriculture et de la
Pêche, Ministre de l'Intérieur, de l'Outre-mer et des Collectivités
territoriales, Ministre de l'Économie, de l'Industrie et de l'Emploi
— intervening party: G.I.E. Pari Mutuel Urbain (PMU)

2.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 197/13

Questions referred

Pleas in law and main arguments

the Treaty establishing the
1. Are Articles 49 and 50 of
European Community to be
interpreted as precluding
national legislation which has established a system whereby
off-course horserace betting is managed exclusively by a
single, non-profit-making operator where, although that
system appears to fit the purpose of combating criminality
and thus of protecting public order more effectively than
would less restrictive measures,
is accompanied by a
dynamic commercial policy on the part of the operator, in
order
to neutralise the risk of unauthorised gambling
networks emerging and to channel bettors towards the
lawful offer, that does not, in consequence, fully achieve the
objective of reducing gambling opportunities?

it

2. Is it appropriate,

in order to determine whether national
legislation such as that in force in France, which has estab-
lished a system whereby off-course horserace betting is
managed exclusively by a single, non-profit-making operator,
is contrary to Articles 49 and 50 of the Treaty establishing
to assess the impairment of
the European Community,
freedom to provide services solely from the point of view of
the restrictions placed on offering on-line horserace betting,
or is it appropriate to take into consideration the entire
horserace betting sector in whatever form it is offered and is
accessible to bettors?

The period for transposition of Directive 2006/100/EC into
national law expired on 1 January 2007.

(1) OJ L 363, 20.12.2006, p. 141.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale
Ordinario di Milano (Italy) lodged on 22 May 2008 — Rita
Mariano v Istituto nazionale per l'assicurazione contro gli
infortuni sul lavoro (INAIL)

(Case C-217/08)

(2008/C 197/22)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale Ordinario di Milano

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Rita Mariano

Action brought on 21 May 2008 — Commission of the
European Communities v Kingdom of Spain

Defendant: Istituto nazionale per l'assicurazione contro gli infor-
tuni sul lavoro (INAIL)

(Case C-213/08)

(2008/C 197/21)

Language of the case: Spanish

Question referred

Whether Articles 12 and 13 of the EC Treaty preclude the appli-
cation of Article 85 of DPR No 1124/1965 in so far as it
provides that, in the event of death as a result of an accident,
only a spouse is entitled to an INAIL annuity at the rate of
50 % and a child [of a non-spouse] is entitled only to an
annuity at the rate of 20 %.

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: H. Støvlbæk, acting as Agent)

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain

Form of order sought

— declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and
administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council
Directive 2006/100/EC of 20 November 2006 adapting
certain Directives in the field of freedom of movement of
persons, by reason of
the accession of Bulgaria and
Romania (1), and, in any event, by failing to communicate
them to the Commission, the Kingdom of Spain has failed
to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

Action brought on 22 May 2008 — Commission of the
European Communities v Italian Republic

(Case C-218/08)

(2008/C 197/23)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: B. Schima and D. Recchia, acting as Agents)

— order the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities