Case C-543/12: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Najvyšší súd Slovenskej republiky (Slovakia) lodged on 28 November 2012 — Michal Zeman v Krajské riaditeľstvo Policajného zboru v Žiline
Date: 2012-11-28
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: arms control, interpretation of the law, official document, personal weapon








C_2013063EN.01000801.xml










2.3.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 63/8





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Najvyšší súd Slovenskej republiky (Slovakia) lodged on 28 November 2012 — Michal Zeman v Krajské riaditeľstvo Policajného zboru v Žiline
(Case C-543/12)
2013/C 63/14
Language of the case: Slovak

Referring court

Najvyšší súd Slovenskej republiky

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Michal Zeman

Defendant: Krajské riaditeľstvo Policajného zboru v Žiline

Questions referred







1.


Is Article 1(4) in conjunction with Article 3 [of Council Directive 91/477/EEC (1) (‘the Directive’)] and Articles 45(1) and 52 of the Charter [of Fundamental Rights of the European Union] to be interpreted as






(a)


precluding a Member State from adopting legislation which would prevent a European firearms pass from being issued under Article 1(4) of the Directive to the holder of a firearms licence (the relevant authorisation to possess a firearm), which was issued for a purpose other than for hunting or target shooting use and which otherwise allows that person to possess (and carry) the firearm for which he is requesting that that European firearms pass be issued,
despite the fact that:










(b)


the legislation of that Member State (the home State) allows the licence holder, even without the European firearms pass, to take that firearm out of its territory to the territory of another Member State provided, merely, that he meets reporting obligations, and, even where a European firearms pass was issued, the position of that licence holder would not change in any way in relation to that home Member State (that is to say, that person would only have to meet identical reporting obligations) ?














2.


If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, where the legislation of the Member State precludes the issue of a European firearms pass to such a licence holder, does Article 1(4) of the Directive have direct effect so that the Member State is on the basis of that provision required to issue a European firearms pass to that licence holder?










3.


If the answer to the first or the second question is in the negative, is the competent authority required to interpret legislation of the Member State, which:






(a)


does not expressly prohibit the abovementioned licence holder from obtaining the European firearms pass, but










(b)


provides for the issue of a European firearms pass only to a person holding a firearms licence (the relevant authorisation to possess a firearm) which was issued for hunting or target shooting purposes,








to the greatest possible extent so that the competent authority is required to issue a European firearms pass also to the holder of a firearms licence which was not issued for hunting or target shooting purposes, in so far as this is possible through giving indirect effect to the Directive?


(1)  OJ 1991 L 256, p. 51.