Judgment of the Court of 10 May 2016 in Case E-19/15 — EFTA Surveillance Authority v The Principality of Liechtenstein (Failure by an EEA/EFTA State to fulfil its obligations — Prior authorisation schemes for establishment and cross-border services — Directive 2006/123/EC — Article 31 EEA — Article 36 EEA — Justification — Proportionality)
Date: 2016-05-10
Institutions: EFTA Court
Subjects: Liechtenstein, administrative formalities, freedom to provide services, infringement procedure (EU), principle of proportionality, provision of services, right of establishment








C_2017066EN.01003001.xml










2.3.2017   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 66/30





JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
of 10 May 2016
in Case E-19/15
EFTA Surveillance Authority v The Principality of Liechtenstein
(Failure by an EEA/EFTA State to fulfil its obligations — Prior authorisation schemes for establishment and cross-border services — Directive 2006/123/EC — Article 31 EEA — Article 36 EEA — Justification — Proportionality)
(2017/C 66/09)
In Case E-19/15, EFTA Surveillance Authority v The Principality of Liechtenstein — APPLICATION for a declaration that by maintaining in force national rules on prior authorisation schemes for undertakings willing to establish themselves and/or to provide cross-border services in Liechtenstein, the Principality of Liechtenstein has breached its obligations arising from Articles 9, 10, 13 and 16 of the Act referred to at point 1 of Annex X to the EEA Agreement (Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market), as adapted to the EEA Agreement under its Protocol 1, and, to the extent that establishment and the provision of cross-border services fall outside the scope of that act, its obligations arising from Articles 31 and 36 of the EEA Agreement, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen (Judge-Rapporteur) and Páll Hreinsson, Judges, gave judgment on 10 May 2016, the operative part of which is as follows:
The Court hereby:






1.


Declares that the Principality of Liechtenstein has breached its obligations arising from Articles 9, 10, 13 and 16 of the Act referred to at point 1 of Annex X to the EEA Agreement (Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market), as adapted to the EEA Agreement under its Protocol 1:






(a)


by maintaining in force Article 7 of the Liechtenstein Trade Act which sets up a prior authorisation scheme for undertakings intending to establish themselves in Liechtenstein;










(b)


by maintaining in force Article 8(1) of the Liechtenstein Trade Act in so far as it imposes conditions that are not clear and unambiguous for granting prior authorisation for undertakings wishing to establish themselves in Liechtenstein, namely the conditions to have the necessary personnel and to have an adequate command of the German language;










(c)


by failing to ensure that the conditions for the prior authorisation laid down by the Liechtenstein Trade Act do not duplicate requirements and controls which are equivalent or essentially comparable as regards their purpose to which the service provider is already subject in another EEA State;










(d)


by failing to ensure that the procedure and formalities concerning the prior authorisation under the Liechtenstein Trade Act are clearly laid down; and,










(e)


by maintaining in force Article 21 of the Liechtenstein Trade Act which requires undertakings to notify in advance their intention to provide cross-border services in Liechtenstein.














2.


Declares that, to the extent that the services covered by the Liechtenstein Trade Act fall outside the scope of the Act referred to at point 1 of Annex X to the EEA Agreement (Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market), as adapted to the EEA Agreement under its Protocol 1, the Principality of Liechtenstein has breached its obligations arising from Articles 31 and 36 of the EEA Agreement:






(a)


by maintaining in force Article 7 of the Liechtenstein Trade Act; and,










(b)


by maintaining in force Article 21 of the Liechtenstein Trade Act.














3.


Orders the Principality of Liechtenstein to bear the costs of the proceedings.