CELEX: 62008CN0447
Language: en
Date: 2008-10-13 00:00:00
Title: Case C-447/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Svea hovrätt (Sweden) lodged on 13 October 2008 — Otto Sjöberg v Åklagaren

20.12.2008   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 327/17
            
         Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Svea hovrätt (Sweden) lodged on 13 October 2008 — Otto Sjöberg v Åklagaren
   (Case C-447/08)
   (2008/C 327/28)
   Language of the case: Swedish
   Referring court
   Svea hovrätt
   Parties to the main proceedings
   
      Applicant: Otto Sjöberg
   
      Defendant: Åklagaren
   Questions referred
   
               1.
            
            
               May discrimination on grounds of nationality be accepted, under some circumstances, on national gaming and lottery markets on the basis of overriding reasons in the general interest?
            
         
               2.
            
            
               If there are a number of objectives pursued by the restrictive policy adopted on a national gaming and lottery market and one of them is the financing of social activities, can the latter then be said to be an incidental beneficial consequence of the restrictive policy? If this question is answered in the negative, can the restrictive policy pursued still be acceptable if the objective of financing social activities cannot be said to be the principal objective of the restrictive policy?
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Can the State rely on overriding reasons in the general interest as justification for a restrictive gaming policy if State-controlled companies market gaming and lotteries, the revenue from which accrues to the State, and one of several objectives of that marketing is the financing of social activities? If this question is answered in the negative, can the restrictive policy pursued still be acceptable if the financing of social activities is not found to be the principal objective of the marketing?
            
         
               4.
            
            
               Can a total prohibition on the marketing of gaming and lotteries organised in another Member State by a gaming company established there and supervised by that Member State's authorities be proportionate to the objective of controlling and supervising gaming activity, when at the same time there are no restrictions on the marketing of gaming and lotteries organised by gaming companies established in the Member State which pursues the restrictive policy? What is the answer to the question if the objective of such an arrangement is to limit gaming?
            
         
               5.
            
            
               Is a gaming operator who has been granted a licence to operate certain gaming activities in a State and is supervised by the competent authority in that State entitled to market its gaming products in other Member States through, for example, advertisements in newspapers, without first applying for a licence from those States' competent authorities? If this question is answered in the affirmative, does this mean that a Member State's rules which are based on the imposition of criminal penalties on the promotion of participation in lotteries organised abroad constitute an obstacle to the freedom of establishment and the freedom to provide services which can never be accepted on the basis of overriding reasons in the general interest? Is it of any significance for the answer to the first question whether the Member State where the gaming operator is established invokes the same overriding reasons in the general interest as the State where the operator wishes to market its gaming activities?