Case C-375/17: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 19 December 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Stanley International Betting Ltd, Stanleybet Malta Ltd v Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze, Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Articles 49 and 56 TFEU — Freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services — Games of chance — Concession for management of the computerised Lotto and other fixed-odds numerical games according to the sole concessionaire model — Restriction — Overriding reasons in the public interest — Proportionality)
Date: 2018-12-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative transparency, equal treatment, free competition, freedom to provide services, game of chance, principle of proportionality, service concession, tendering








C_2019065EN.01000901.xml










18.2.2019   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 65/9






Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 19 December 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Stanley International Betting Ltd, Stanleybet Malta Ltd v Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze, Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli
(Case C-375/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Articles 49 and 56 TFEU - Freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services - Games of chance - Concession for management of the computerised Lotto and other fixed-odds numerical games according to the sole concessionaire model - Restriction - Overriding reasons in the public interest - Proportionality))
(2019/C 65/10)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: Stanley International Betting Ltd, Stanleybet Malta Ltd

Defendants: Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze, Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli

Interveners in support of the defendants: Lottomatica SpA, Lottoitalia Srl

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Articles 49 and 56 TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding national rules, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, which provide, for the concession for management of the computerised Lotto and other fixed-odds numerical games, a sole concessionaire model, unlike other games, prediction games and betting, to which a multiple concessionaire model applies, provided that the national court establishes that the national rules actually pursue, in a consistent and systematic manner, the objectives relied on by the Member State concerned.










2.


Articles 49 and 56 TFEU and the principles of non-discrimination, transparency and proportionality must be interpreted as meaning that they do not preclude national rules and the relevant implementing acts, such as those at issue in the case in the main proceedings, which provide, for the concession for management of the computerised Lotto and other fixed-odds numerical games, a high basic contract value, provided that that value is formulated in a clear, precise and unambiguous manner and that it is objectively justified, which is for the national court to determine.










3.


Articles 49 and 56 TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding a provision, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, contained in a model concession contract relating to a call for tenders and which provides for the withdrawal of the concession for management of the computerised Lotto and other fixed-odds numerical games:






—


for any type of offence in relation to which indictment is provided for and which, because of its nature, seriousness, method of commission and connection with the activity for which the concession was awarded, the contracting authority takes the view that it is such as to preclude the concessionaire possessing the requisite reliability, professionalism and moral quality,










—


or if the concessionaire infringes the rules on the prevention of irregular, unlawful and covert gaming and, in particular, where the concessionaire itself, or a company controlled by or linked to it, wherever located, markets other games comparable to the computerised Lotto and other fixed-odds numerical games, without possessing the requisite licence,




provided that those clauses are justified and are proved to be proportionate to the objective pursued and comply with the principle of transparency, which is for the national court to determine in the light of the guidance set out in the present judgment.






(1)  OJ C 330, 2.10.2017.