CELEX: C2005/182/03
Language: en
Date: 2005-07-23 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 31 May 2005 in Case C-438/02: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Stockholms tingsrätt in criminal proceedings against Krister Hanner (Articles 28 EC, 31 EC, 43 EC and 86(2) EC — Marketing of medicinal preparations — Establishment of retail traders — National monopoly on the retail of medicinal preparations — Undertaking entrusted with providing a service of general economic interest)

23.7.2005   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 182/2
            
         
      JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
   
   (Grand Chamber)
   of 31 May 2005
   in Case C-438/02: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Stockholms tingsrätt in criminal proceedings against Krister Hanner (1)
   
   (Articles 28 EC, 31 EC, 43 EC and 86(2) EC - Marketing of medicinal preparations - Establishment of retail traders - National monopoly on the retail of medicinal preparations - Undertaking entrusted with providing a service of general economic interest)
   (2005/C 182/03)
   Language of the case: Swedish
   In Case C-438/02: reference for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the Stockholms tingsrätt (Sweden), made by decision of 29 November 2002, received at the Court on 4 December 2002, in criminal proceedings against Krister Hanner, the Court (Grand Chamber), composed of V. Skouris, President of the Chamber, P. Jann (Rapporteur), C.W.A. Timmermans and A. Rosas, Presidents of Chambers, J-P. Puissochet, R. Schintgen, N. Colneric, S. von Bahr and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges; P. Léger, Advocate General; M. Múgica Arzamendi, Principal Administrator, for the, Registrar, gave a judgment on 31 May 2005, the operative part of which is as follows:
   Article 31(1) EC precludes a sales regime which grants an exclusive retail right and is arranged in the same way as the sales regime at issue in the main proceedings.
   
      (1)  OJ C 31 of 08.02.2003.