natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
121 Secondly, it emerges from point 7(c) of that annex that, in the event that several candidates score an equal number of points on the scale, licences are to be granted in accordance with an order of priority in which precedence is given, after the categories of pharmacist described in point 7(a) and (b), to pharmacists who have pursued their professional activities within the Autonomous Community of Asturias.
121 Kao drugo, iz točke 7.(c) tog Priloga proizlazi da se, u slučaju da nekoliko kandidata ostvari jednaki broj bodova na ljestvici, dozvole po prioritetnom redu dodjeljuju, nakon kategorija ljekarnika opisanih u točkama 7.(a) i (b), ljekarnicima koji su svoju profesionalnu djelatnost obavljali u autonomnoj zajednici Asturiji.
122 Thus, by dint of those two criteria, the selection process favours pharmacists who have pursued their activities on part of the national territory.
122 Tako, na temelju ta dva kriterija, izborni postupak daje prednost ljekarnicima koji su svoju djelatnost obavljali na dotičnom državnom području.
Obviously, such a criterion can be more easily met by national pharmacists, who more often pursue their economic activities on the national territory, than by pharmacists who are nationals of other Member States, who more frequently pursue those activities in another Member State (see, by analogy, Hartmann, paragraph 31).
Očito je da te kriterije lakše mogu ispuniti domaći ljekarnici koji svoju gospodarsku djelatnost puno češće obavljaju na državnom području nego ljekarnici koji su državljani drugih država članica i koji puno češće tu djelatnost obavljaju u drugoj državi članici (vidjeti po analogiji gore navedenu presudu Hartmann, t. 31.).
123 The Consejería de Salud y Servicios Sanitarios and the Principado de Asturias contend, however, that the difference in treatment can be justified by the need to maintain a level of quality in the pharmaceutical service, given that its quality would be impaired if pharmacists who had set up in business were not immediately capable of providing pharmaceutical services.
123 Međutim, Consejería de Salud y Servicios Sanitarios i Principado de Asturias tvrde da se razlika u postupanju može opravdati potrebom održavanja razine kvalitete ljekarničkih usluga s obzirom na to da bi kvaliteta bila umanjena kad ljekarnici koji su već pokrenuli posao ne bi mogli odmah početi pružati ljekarničke usluge.
If pharmacists are to be able to operate immediately in this way, they need, in particular, to be acquainted with the health programmes provided for by the regional administration, and the way in which the pharmacies in that region operate.
Ako ljekarnici moraju odmah biti u stanju započeti raditi na taj način, oni prije svega trebaju biti upoznati sa zdravstvenim programima koje propisuje regionalna uprava i s načinom na koji ljekarne u dotičnoj regiji rade.
124 Such arguments cannot be upheld since, under Article 1(1) and (2) of Directive 85/432 and Article 45(2)(e) and (g) of Directive 2005/36, holders of evidence of formal qualifications in pharmacy at university level must be able to gain access to the activities of preparation, testing, storage and supply of medicinal products in pharmacies open to the public and the activities of provision of information and advice on medicinal products.
124 Takve argumente nije moguće prihvatiti budući da na temelju članka 1. stavaka 1. i 2. Direktive 85/432 i članka 45. stavka 2. točaka (e) i (g) Direktive 2005/36, osobe koje posjeduju dokaze o formalnoj osposobljenosti iz farmacije sveučilišnog stupnja moraju imati pristup djelatnostima pripreme, testiranja, skladištenja i nabavke lijekova u ljekarnama javnim ljekarnama te djelatnostima informiranja i savjetovanja o lijekovima.
In those circumstances, the requirements referred to in paragraph 123 above cannot be relied upon to justify unequal treatment such as that at issue in the cases before the referring court.
U tim okolnostima nije se moguće pozivati na zahtjeve iz prethodne točke da bi se opravdalo nejednako postupanje poput onoga o kojem je riječ u predmetima pred sudom koji je uputio zahtjev.
125 In the light of the foregoing, the answer to the second part of the questions referred is that Article 49 TFEU, read in conjunction with Article 1(1) and (2) of Directive 85/432 and Article 45(2)(e) and (g) of Directive 2005/36, must be interpreted as precluding criteria, such as those set out in points 6 and 7(c) of the Annex to Decree 72/2001, under which licensees for new pharmacies are to be selected.
125 S obzirom na gore navedeno, na drugi dio postavljenih pitanja valja odgovoriti da članak 49. UFEU-a, u vezi s člankom 1. stavcima 1. i 2. Direktive 85/432 i člankom 45. stavkom 2. točkama (e) i (g) Direktive 2005/36, treba tumačiti u smislu da su mu protivni kriteriji, poput onih utvrđenih točkama 6. i 7. (c) Priloga Dekretu 72/2001, na temelju kojih se odabiru nositelji dozvola za nove ljekarne.
1. Article 49 TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding, in principle, national legislation, such as that at issue in the cases before the referring court, which imposes restrictions on the issue of licences for the opening of new pharmacies, by providing that:
1. Članak 49. UFEU-a treba tumačiti u smislu da mu u načelu nije protivan nacionalni propis, poput onog o kojem je riječ u predmetima pred sudom koji je uputio zahtjev, a koji nameće ograničenja u izdavanju dozvola za otvaranje novih ljekarni, prema kojem:
Nevertheless, Article 49 TFEU precludes such national legislation in so far as the basic `2 800 inhabitants' and `250 metres' rules prevent, in any geographical area which has special demographic features, the establishment of a sufficient number of pharmacies to ensure adequate pharmaceutical services, that being a matter for the national court to ascertain.
Međutim, takav nacionalni propis protivan je članku 49. UFEU-a ako osnovna pravila „2800 stanovnika" i „250 m" u bilo kojem zemljopisnom području s posebnim demografskim obilježjima onemogućuju otvaranje dovoljnog broja ljekarni koji bi osigurao odgovarajuću ljekarničku uslugu, što je na nacionalnom sudu da utvrdi.
2. Article 49 TFEU, read in conjunction with Article 1(1) and (2) of Council Directive 85/432/EEC of 16 September 1985 concerning the coordination of provisions laid down by Law, Regulation or Administrative Action in respect of certain activities in the field of pharmacy, and Article 45(2)(e) and (g) of Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications must be interpreted as precluding criteria, such as those set out in points 6 and 7(c) of the Annex to Decree 72/2001 of 19 July 2001, regulating pharmacies and dispensaries in the Principality of Asturias (Decreto 72/2001 regulador de las oficinas de farmacia y botiquines en el Principado de Asturias), under which licensees for new pharmacies are to be selected.
2. Članak 49. UFEU-a, u vezi s člankom 1. stavcima 1. i 2. Direktive Vijeća 85/432/EEZ od 16. rujna 1985. o usklađivanju odredaba utvrđenih zakonom i drugim propisima u pogledu određenih djelatnosti u području farmacije i člankom 45. stavkom 2. točkama (e) i (g) Direktive 2005/36/EZ Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća od 7. rujna 2005. o priznavanju stručnih kvalifikacija treba tumačiti u smislu da su mu protivni kriteriji poput onih utvrđenih točkama 6. i 7. (c) Priloga Dekretu 72/2001 koji uređuje pitanje ljekarni i ljekarničkih depoa u kneževini Asturiji, (Decreto 72/2001 regulador de las oficinas de farmacia y botiquines en el Principado de Asturias), na temelju kojih se odabiru nositelji dozvola za nove ljekarne.
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Second Chamber)
PRESUDA SUDA (drugo vijeće)
(Article 49 EC - Restrictions on the freedom to provide services - Games of chance - Offer of games of chance via the internet - Legislation reserving a licence to a single operator - Refusal to grant an operating licence to an operator who is licensed in other Member States - Justification - Proportionality - Review of each specific measure applying national legislation)
„Članak 49. UEZ-a - Ograničenja slobode pružanja usluga - Igre na sreću - Ponuda igara na sreću na internetu - Propis kojim se odobrenje rezervira za samo jedan subjekt - Odbijanje da se odobrenje za obavljanje djelatnosti dodijeli subjektu koji ima odobrenje u drugim državama članicama - Opravdanost - Proporcionalnost - Ispitivanje svake konkretne mjere za provedbu nacionalnog propisa"
REFERENCE for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands), made by decision of 13 June 2008, received at the Court on 18 June 2008, in the proceedings
povodom zahtjeva za prethodnu odluku na temelju članka 234. UEZ-a, koji je uputio Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Vrhovni sud Nizozemske), odlukom od 13. lipnja 2008., koju je Sud zaprimio 18. lipnja 2008., u postupku
Ladbrokes Betting & Gaming Ltd,
Ladbrokes Betting & Gaming Ltd,
Ladbrokes International Ltd
Ladbrokes International Ltd
v Stichting de Nationale Sporttotalisator,
protiv Stichting de Nationale Sporttotalisator,
composed of J.N. Cunha Rodrigues (Rapporteur), President of the Chamber, P. Lindh, A. Rosas, U. Lõhmus and A. Arabadjiev, Judges,
u sastavu: J. N. Cunha Rodrigues (izvjestitelj), predsjednik vijeća, P. Lindh, A. Rosas, U. Lõhmus i A. Arabadjiev, suci,
Registrar: R. Şereş, Administrator,
tajnik: R. Şereş, administratorica,
having regard to the written procedure and further to the hearing on 12 November 2009,
uzimajući u obzir pisani postupak i nakon rasprave održane 12. studenoga 2009.,
Ladbrokes Betting & Gaming Ltd and Ladbrokes International Ltd, by W. Hoyng and M. Meulenbelt, advocaten, instructed by S. Kon and M. Evans, Solicitors,
za Ladbrokes Betting & Gaming Ltd i Ladbrokes International Ltd, W. Hoyng i M. Meulenbelt, advocaten, koje su ovlastili S. Kon i M. Evans, solicitors,
Stichting de Nationale Sporttotalisator, by E. Pijnacker Hordijk, J. van Manen and M. van Wissen, advocaten,
za Stichting de Nationale Sporttotalisator, E. Pijnacker Hordijk, J. van Manen i M. van Wissen, advocaten,
the Netherlands Government, by C. Wissels, M. de Grave and Y. de Vries, acting as Agents,
za nizozemsku vladu, C. Wissels, M. de Grave i Y. de Vries, u svojstvu agenata,
the Belgian Government, by A. Hubert and L. Van den Broeck, acting as Agents, and by P. Vlaemminck, advocaat,
za belgijsku vladu, A. Hubert i L. Van den Broeck, u svojstvu agenata, uz asistenciju P. Vlaemmincka, advocaat,
the Danish Government, by J. Bering Liisberg and V. Pasternak Jørgensen, acting as Agents,
za dansku vladu, J. Bering Liisberg i V. Pasternak Jørgensen, u svojstvu agenata,
the German Government, by M. Lumma and B. Klein, acting as Agents,
za njemačku vladu, M. Lumma i B. Klein, u svojstvu agenata,
the Greek Government, by A. Samoni-Rantou, O. Patsopoulou and M. Tassopoulou, acting as Agents,
za grčku vladu, A. Samoni-Rantou, O. Patsopoulou i M. Tassopoulou, u svojstvu agenata,
the Spanish Government, by F. Díez Moreno, acting as Agent,
za španjolsku vladu, F. Díez Moreno, u svojstvu agenta,
the Austrian Government, by C. Pesendorfer, acting as Agent,
za austrijsku vladu, C. Pesendorfer, u svojstvu agenta,
the Finnish Government, by A. Guimaraes-Purokoski, acting as Agent,
za finsku vladu, A. Guimaraes-Purokoski, u svojstvu agenta,
the Norwegian Government, by P. Wennerås and K. Moe Winther, acting as Agents,
za norvešku vladu, P. Wennerås i K. Moe Winther, u svojstvu agenata,
the Commission of the European Communities, by E. Traversa, A. Nijenhuis and S. Noë, acting as Agents,
za Komisiju Europskih zajednica, E. Traversa, A. Nijenhuis i S. Noë, u svojstvu agenata,
1 This reference for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Article 49 EC.
1 Zahtjev za prethodnu odluku odnosi se na tumačenje članka 49. UEZ-a.
2 The reference has been made in proceedings between the Stichting de Nationale Sporttotalisator, a foundation governed by Netherlands law (`De Lotto'), and Ladbrokes Betting & Gaming Ltd and Ladbrokes International Ltd, companies established in the United Kingdom (`the Ladbrokes companies'), concerning the possibly unlawful conduct of those companies on the Netherlands market for games of chance.
2 Zahtjev je upućen u okviru spora između Stichting de Nationale Sporttotalisator, zaklade koja se ravna prema nizozemskom pravu (u daljnjem tekstu: De Lotto) i Ladbrokes Betting & Gaming Ltd i Ladbrokes International Ltd, društava s poslovnim nastanom u Ujedinjenoj Kraljevini (u daljnjem tekstu: društva Ladbrokes), u vezi s mogućim nezakonitim postupanjem tih društava na nizozemskom tržištu igara na sreću.
3 Article 1 of the Law on games of chance (Wet op de kansspelen; `the Wok') provides:
3 Članak 1. Zakona o igrama na sreću (Wet op de kansspelen, u daljnjem tekstu: Wok) propisuje:
`Subject to the provisions of Title Va of this Law, the following are prohibited:
„U skladu s odredbama glave V.a ovog zakona, zabranjuje se sljedeće:
(a) providing an opportunity to compete for prizes if the winners are designated by means of any calculation of probability over which the participants are generally unable to exercise a dominant influence, unless a licence therefor has been granted pursuant to this Law;
(a) pružanje mogućnosti za sudjelovanja u igrama na sreću za novčane ili druge dobitke ako se dobitnici određuju samo na temelju slučajnosti na koju sudionici općenito nemaju nikakav prevladavajući utjecaj, osim ako je za to izdano odobrenje na temelju ovog Zakona;
(b) promoting participation either in an opportunity as referred to under (a), provided without a licence pursuant to this Law, or in a similar opportunity, provided outside the Kingdom of the Netherlands in Europe, or to maintain a stock of materials intended to publicise or disseminate knowledge of such opportunities; ...'
(b) poticanje sudjelovanja u priredbama iz točke (a) bez odobrenja izdanog u skladu s ovim Zakonom ili u sličnoj priredbi izvan Kraljevine Nizozemske u Europi, ili pohranjivanje dokumenata za oglašavanje ili objavu u tu svrhu; [...]"
4 Article 16 of the Wok is worded as follows:
4 Članak 16. Woka glasi:
`1. The Minister for Justice and the Minister for Welfare, Public Health and Culture may grant to one legal person with full legal capacity a licence, for a period to be determined by them, to organise sports-related prize competitions in the interests of bodies operating for public benefit, particularly in the area of sport and physical education, culture, social welfare and public health.
„1. Ministar pravosuđa i ministar socijalne skrbi, javnog zdravlja i kulture mogu potpuno pravno sposobnoj pravnoj osobi dodijeliti na razdoblje koje oni odrede odobrenje za priređivanje nagradnih igara povezanih sa sportom radi promicanja interesa institucija koje djeluju u općem interesu, osobito u području sporta i tjelesnog odgoja, kulture, socijalne skrbi i javnog zdravlja.
2. The proceeds from prize competitions ... shall be applied in respect of the interests which the legal person intends to serve by organising and operating sports-related prize competitions.
2. Prihodi od nagradnih igara [...] upotrebljavaju se za interese koje pravna osoba namjerava ostvariti priređivanjem nagradnih igara povezanih sa sportskim događajima i njihovim upravljanjem.
3. At least 47.5% of total proceeds from games of chance organised pursuant to this Title and to Title IVa, to be calculated on the basis of a calendar year, shall be allocated to the distribution of prizes. ...'
3. Najmanje 47,5 % ukupnih prihoda od igara na sreću koje su priređene u skladu s ovom glavom i glavom IV.a, izračunanih na temelju kalendarske godine, dodjeljuje se za podjelu nagrada. [...]"
5 Article 21 of the Wok states:
5 Članak 21. Woka propisuje:
1. The Ministers referred to in Article 16 shall lay down rules concerning licences for the organisation of sports-related prize competitions.
„1. Ministri iz članka 16. utvrđuju pravila u vezi s odobrenjima za priređivanje nagradnih igara povezanih sa sportskim događajima.
2. Those rules relate, inter alia, to:
2. Ta se pravila osobito odnose na:
a. the number of competitions to be organised;
(a) broj nagradnih igara koje će se prirediti;
b. the method of determining results and the prize scheme;
(b) način određivanja rezultata i sustav nagrada;
c. the management and covering of organisational costs;
(c) upravljanje troškovima priređivanja i njihovo pokrivanje;
d. the allocation of revenue from competitions organised;
(d) raspodjelu prihoda od priređenih nagradnih igara;
e. the constitution and regulations of the legal person;
(e) statut i pravilnik pravne osobe;
f. monitoring of compliance with the legislation by the authorities;
(f) nadzor usklađenosti s propisom koji provode nadležna tijela;
g. delivery and publication of the report to be drawn up annually by the legal person concerning its activities and financial results.'
(g) predstavljanje i objavljivanje izvješća o aktivnostima i financijskim rezultatima koje pravna osoba izrađuje svake godine."
6 Netherlands legislation in relation to games of chance is based on a system of exclusive licences under which (i) the organisation or promotion of games of chance is prohibited unless an administrative licence for that purpose has been issued, and (ii) only one licence is granted by the national authorities in respect of each of the games of chance authorised.
6 Nizozemski propis o igrama na sreću temelji se na sustavu ekskluzivnih odobrenja na temelju kojih se, s jedne strane, zabranjuje priređivanje ili poticanje igara na sreću, osim ako je za tu namjenu izdano administrativno odobrenje i, s druge strane, nacionalna tijela dodjeljuju samo jedno odobrenje za svaku od odobrenih igara na sreću.
7 Furthermore, it is apparent from the case-file in the main proceedings as supplied to the Court by the referring court that there is no possibility at all of offering games of chance interactively via the internet in the Netherlands.
7 Nadalje, iz spisa glavnog postupka, kako ga je sud koji je uputio zahtjev poslao Sudu, proizlazi da u Nizozemskoj nije moguće igre na sreću interaktivno nuditi na internetu.
8 De Lotto is a non-profit-making foundation governed by private law which holds a licence for the organisation of sports-related prize competitions, the lottery and numbers games.
8 De Lotto je neprofitna zaklada privatnog prava koja ima odobrenje za priređivanje nagradnih igara povezanih sa sportom, lutrijskih igara i brojčanih igara.
Its objects, according to its constitution, are the collection of funds by means of the organisation of games of chance and the distribution of those funds among institutions working in the public interest, particularly in the fields of sport, physical education, general welfare, public health and culture.
U skladu s njezinim statutom, cilj je zaklade De Lotto prikupljanje sredstava priređivanjem igara na sreću i raspodjela tih sredstava među institucijama koje djeluju u općem interesu, osobito u području sporta, tjelesnog odgoja, opće socijalne skrbi, javnog zdravlja i kulture.
9 The Ladbrokes companies are engaged in the organisation of sports-related prize competitions and are particularly well known for their bookmaking business.
9 Društva Ladbrokes priređuju nagradne igre povezane sa sportom i osobito su poznata po uslugama prikupljanja oklada („bookmaking").
They offer a number of mainly sports-related games of chance on their internet site.
Na svojoj internetskoj stranici nude brojne igre na sreću koje su uglavnom povezane sa sportom.
They also offer the possibility of participating via a freephone number in the betting activities which they organise.
Jednako tako nude mogućnost sudjelovanja putem besplatnog telefonskog broja u aktivnostima klađenja koje priređuju.
The companies do not physically carry on any activity in the Netherlands.
Ta društva na nizozemskom državnom području fizički ne obavljaju nikakve djelatnosti.
10 De Lotto alleged that the Ladbrokes companies were, via the internet, offering games of chance to persons residing in the Netherlands for which they did not have the requisite licence under the Wok, and made an application for interim relief to the Rechtbank Arnhem (District Court, Arnhem) for the Ladbrokes companies to be required to put an end to that activity.
10 De Lotto je naveo da su društva Ladbrokes osobama koje su rezidenti Nizozemske na internetu nudila igre na sreću za koje nisu imala potrebno odobrenje u skladu s Wokom i zatražio je od suca privremene pravne zaštite pri Rechtbank Arnhem (Prvostupanjski sud u Arnhemu) da društvima Ladbrokes zabrani tu djelatnost.
11 By judgment of 27 January 2003, the Rechtbank judge hearing the application for interim relief allowed the application and ordered the Ladbrokes companies to take steps to block access to their internet site for persons residing in the Netherlands and to make it impossible for such persons to participate in telephone betting.
11 Presudom od 27. siječnja 2003. sudac privremene pravne zaštite navedenog suda udovoljio je tom zahtjevu i naložio društvima Ladbrokes donošenje mjera kojima će osobama koje su rezidenti Nizozemske blokirati pristup svojoj internetskoj stranici i onemogućiti im sudjelovanje u telefonskom klađenju.
Those measures were confirmed by the judgments of the Gerechtshof te Arnhem (Regional Court of Appeal, Arnhem) and the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Supreme Court) of 2 September 2003 and 18 February 2005, respectively.
Te su mjere bile potvrđene presudama Gerechtshof te Arnhem (Žalbeni sud u Arnhemu) i Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Vrhovni sud) od 2. rujna 2003. odnosno 18. veljače 2005.
12 On 21 February 2003, De Lotto also issued proceedings against the Ladbrokes companies in a substantive action before the Rechtbank Arnhem.
12 De Lotto je 21. veljače 2003. pred Rechtbank Arnhem podigao i tužbu protiv društava Ladbrokes u glavnom postupku.
In its application, De Lotto sought confirmation of the coercive measures imposed on those companies by the judge who had heard the application for interim relief.
Svojim je zahtjevom De Lotto tražio potvrdu prisilnih mjera koje je tim društvima nametnuo sudac privremene pravne zaštite. Odlukom od 31. kolovoza 2005.
By decision of 31 August 2005, the Rechtbank allowed De Lotto's application and ordered the Ladbrokes companies, on pain of imposition of a periodic penalty, to maintain the measures blocking access to games of chance via the internet or by telephone for persons residing in the Netherlands.
Rechtbank je udovoljio tužbi zaklade De Lotto i naložio društvima Ladbrokes, uz prijetnju novčane kazne, da zadrže mjere kojima se osobama koje su rezidenti Nizozemske blokira telefonski ili internetski pristup igrama na sreću.
That decision was upheld by the judgment of the Gerechtshof te Arnhem of 17 October 2006; the Ladbrokes companies therefore appealed in cassation to the referring court.
Budući da je Gerechtshof te Arnhem potvrdio tu odluku presudom od 17. listopada 2006., društva Ladbrokes podnijela su žalbu u kasacijskom postupku pred sudom koji je uputio zahtjev.
13 The Hoge Raad der Nederlanden took the view that an interpretation of European Union law was required to enable it to determine the dispute before it, and decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following questions to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling:
13 Budući da je Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Vrhovni sud Nizozemske) smatrao da je za odlučivanje o sporu koji se pred njim vodi potrebno tumačenje prava Unije, odlučio je prekinuti postupak i postaviti Sudu sljedeća prethodna pitanja: