- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-470/11: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 19 July 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākās Tiesas Senāts — Latvia) — Garkalns SIA v Rīgas dome (Article 49 EC — Restrictions on freedom to provide services — Equal treatment — Obligation of transparency — Betting and gaming — Casinos, amusement arcades and bingo halls — Obligation to obtain the prior agreement of the municipality of the place of establishment — Discretion — Substantial impairment of the interests of the State and of the residents of the administrative area concerned — Justifications — Proportionality)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62011CA0470
62011CA0470
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
29.9.2012
Official Journal of the European Union
C 295/16
(Case C-470/11) (<span class="super">1</span>)
(Article 49 EC - Restrictions on freedom to provide services - Equal treatment - Obligation of transparency - Betting and gaming - Casinos, amusement arcades and bingo halls - Obligation to obtain the prior agreement of the municipality of the place of establishment - Discretion - Substantial impairment of the interests of the State and of the residents of the administrative area concerned - Justifications - Proportionality)
2012/C 295/27
Language of the case: Latvian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Garkalns SIA
Defendant: Rīgas dome
Re:
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Augstākās tiesas Senāts — Interpretation of Article 56 TFEU (Article 49 EC) — National legislation providing, for the purpose of limiting betting and gaming, a system of authorisation for the establishment of casinos, amusement arcades and bingo halls — Refusal to grant authorisation for the development of an amusement arcade on the ground that the organisation of betting and gaming in the premises envisaged would substantially impair the interests of the residents of the local area
Operative part of the judgment
Article 49 EC must be interpreted as not precluding legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which confers on local authorities a broad discretion in enabling them to refuse authorisation to open a casino, amusement arcade or bingo hall on grounds of ‘substantial impairment of the interests of the State and of the residents of the administrative area concerned’, provided that that legislation is genuinely intended to reduce opportunities for gambling and to limit activities in that domain in a consistent and systematic manner or to ensure the maintenance of public order and in so far as the competent authorities exercise their powers of discretion in a transparent manner, so that the impartiality of the authorisation procedures can be monitored, it being for the national court to determine whether those conditions are satisfied.
(<span class="super">1</span>) OJ C 331, 12.11.2011.