Case C-235/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht Ried im Innkreis (Austria) lodged on 2 June 2008 — Criminal proceedings against Roland Langer
Date: 2008-06-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: State monopoly, advertising, game of chance, gaming establishment, interpretation of the law, public limited company

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/23

In his third ground of appeal, the appellant claims that the
Court of First
Instance disregarded the obligation to state
reasons in judgments and the principles of non-discrimination
and respect for the rights of the defence, and that the Court
distorted the clear sense of the evidence presented for its assess-
ment. This ground of appeal can be broken down into three
parts.

In the first part of the third ground of appeal, the appellant
submits that the Court of First Instance disregarded both the
principle of non-discrimination and its obligation to state
reasons and the rules on the adducing of evidence by
concluding that the fact that some candidates in the competition
had knowledge of the document on which the written test was
based did not imply an infringement of the principle of non-
discrimination and by not
the Commission
the absence of discrimination
provide concrete evidence of
linked to that fact.

requiring that

the clear sense of

In the second part of this third ground of appeal, the appellant
claims that there was an infringement of the principle of non-
discrimination and a distortion of
the
evidence presented for assessment by the Court of First Instance
since the Court considered that the selection board was suffi-
ciently constant in composition to ensure the objective compar-
ison and marking of candidates, when the evidence in the docu-
ments before the Court demonstrated on the contrary that the
composition of
sufficiently
constant and when several essential pieces of factual informa-
tion were not made known to the Court of First Instance by the
Commission.

selection board was not

that

Lastly, in the third part of this ground of appeal, the appellant
relies on a further infringement of the principle of non-discrimi-
nation and the rules on the adducing of evidence, and a viola-
tion of the rights of the defence, in relation to the conclusions
drawn by the Court of First Instance as regards the impartiality
of the members of the selection board.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht
lodged on 2 June 2008 —
Ried im Innkreis (Austria)

Criminal proceedings against Roland Langer

Party to the main proceedings

Roland Langer

Questions referred

1. Is Article 43 EC (Treaty establishing the European Com-
munity,
in the version of 2 October 1997, most recently
amended by the Treaty of 25 April 2005 concerning the
accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania to the
European Union (OJ 2005 L 157, p. 11)) to be interpreted as
precluding a provision which provides that only public
limited companies established in the territory of a particular
Member State may there operate games of chance in casinos,
thereby necessitating the establishment or acquisition of a
company limited by shares in that Member State?

2. Are Articles 43 EC and 49 EC to be interpreted as precluding
a national monopoly on certain types of gaming, such as
games of chance in casinos,
if there is no consistent and
systematic policy whatsoever in the Member State concerned
to limit gaming,
licensed organisers
inasmuch as national
encourage participation in gaming — such as public sports
betting and lotteries — and advertise such gaming (on televi-
sion and in newspapers and magazines) in a manner which
goes as far as offering a cash payment for a lottery ticket
shortly before the lottery draw is made (‘TOI TOI TOI —
Believe in luck!’)?

3. Are Articles 43 EC and 49 EC to be interpreted as precluding
a provision under which all
licences granting the right to
operate games of chance and casinos are issued for a period
of 15 years on the basis of a scheme under which Com-
munity competitors (not belonging to that Member State) are
excluded from the tendering procedure?

a

for

Reference
from the
preliminary
Bundesfinanzhof (Germany) lodged on 4 June 2008 —
Swiss Re Germany Holding GmbH v Finanzamt München
für Körperschaften

ruling

(Case C-235/08)

(2008/C 223/35)

(Case C-242/08)

(2008/C 223/36)

Language of the case: German

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesgericht Ried im Innkreis

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof