CELEX: E2001J0004
Language: en
Date: 2002-05-30 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court of 30 May 2002 in Case E-4/01: Request for an Advisory Opinion from Héraðsdómur Reykjavíkur (Reykjavík District Court): Karl K. Karlsson hf. and The Icelandic State (State alcohol monopoly — incompatibility with Article 16 EEA — State liability in the event of a breach of EEA law — Conditions of liability)

Important legal notice

|

E2001J0004

Judgment of the Court of 30 May 2002 in Case E-4/01: Request for an Advisory Opinion from Héraðsdómur Reykjavíkur (Reykjavík District Court): Karl K. Karlsson hf. and The Icelandic State (State alcohol monopoly — incompatibility with Article 16 EEA — State liability in the event of a breach of EEA law — Conditions of liability)  

Official Journal C 177 , 25/07/2002 P. 0007 - 0007

Judgment of the Courtof 30 May 2002in Case E-4/01: Request for an Advisory Opinion from Héraðsdómur Reykjavíkur (Reykjavík District Court): Karl K. Karlsson hf. and The Icelandic StateState alcohol monopoly - incompatibility with Article 16 EEA - State liability in the event of a breach of EEA law - Conditions of liability(2002/C 177/07)In Case E-4/01: request to the Court under Article 34 of the Agreement between the EFTA States on the establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice by Héraðsdómur Reykjavíkur for an Advisory Opinion in the case pending before it concerning the questions of whether the State monopoly on the import and wholesale distribution of alcoholic beverages in force in Iceland until 1 December 1995 was incompatible with the EEA Agreement, and, if so, whether a prospective importer of alcoholic beverages is entitled to compensation from the State for financial loss incurred as a result of that monopoly, the Court, composed of Thór Vilhjálmsson, President, Carl Baudenbacher and Per Tresselt (Judge-Rapporteur), Judges, gave a judgment on 30 May 2002, the operative part of which declares as follows:1. The maintenance after 1 January 1994 of a State monopoly on the import of alcoholic beverages is incompatible with Article 16 EEA.2. An EEA State will, under the EEA Agreement, be liable to a prospective importer of alcoholic beverages for loss or damage incurred as a result of the maintenance of a State monopoly on the import of alcoholic beverages, provided that the conditions for State liability are fulfilled. Where those conditions are fulfilled, compensation by the State for such loss and damage must be based on national liability law. The rules on compensation laid down by national law must not be less favourable than those relating to similar domestic claims and must not be framed so as to make it in practice impossible or excessively difficult to obtain compensation.3. It is, in principle, for the national court to decide whether the conditions for State liability are fulfilled. In that assessment, the following considerations are to be taken into account: (1) Article 16 EEA is intended to confer rights on individuals; (2) the breach of Article 16 EEA is sufficiently serious to entail liability; (3) whether there is a direct causal link between the breach of Article 16 EEA and any damage sustained, is for the national court to decide.