CELEX: 62017CN0303
Language: en
Date: 2017-05-24 00:00:00
Title: Case C-303/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 24 May 2017 — Headlong Limited v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Központi Irányítása

14.8.2017   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 269/6
            
         Request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 24 May 2017 — Headlong Limited v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Központi Irányítása
   (Case C-303/17)
   (2017/C 269/08)
   Language of the case: Hungarian
   
      Referring court
   
   Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Applicant: Headlong Limited
   
      Defendant: Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Központi Irányítása
   
      Questions referred
   
   
               1.
            
            
               Is it relevant, for the purposes of the reply to be given to the questions referred for a preliminary ruling in Case [C-3/17] by the Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság, that the administrative penalty does not consist of a fine but of temporary inaccessibility of electronic data for a period of 90 days, a penalty which is fundamentally different (for example the provision of the service is temporarily suspended, the penalty decision is not notified and it is not subject to appeal) and which the national authority may also impose cumulatively, in the same act, as well as a fine?
            
         
               2.
            
            
               In view of the nature, seriousness and method of imposing the administrative penalty of temporary inaccessibility of electronic data for a period of 90 days, and, above all, of the impossibility of appealing against it, can it be considered, in accordance with Article 56 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), that that penalty is in itself a disproportionately serious restriction of Article 56 TFEU and of Article 17(1) and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, a restriction which, in its current form, cannot be justified by the objectives of consumer protection established by the Member State in the field of games of chance?
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Is it relevant, for the purposes of the reply to be given to the sixth question referred for a preliminary ruling in Case [C-3/17] by the Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság that the Member State does not ensure the adoption of the rules necessary for obtaining — either by call for tenders for the award of licences, or submitting a tender [to contract] — a licence to organise online casino games, and for this reason service providers cannot obtain the necessary administrative licences for offering the service?