- 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
Opinion of Mr Advocate General Van Gerven delivered on 23 March 1994. # Punto Casa SpA v Sindaco del Comune di Capena and Comune di Capena and Promozioni Polivalenti Venete Soc. coop. arl (PPV) v Sindaco del Comune di Torri di Quartesolo and Comune di Torri di Quartesolo. # References for a preliminary ruling: Pretura circondariale di Roma - Italy. # Interpretation of Articles 30 and 36 of the Treaty - Prohibition on certain kinds of Sunday trading. # Joined cases C-69/93 and C-258/93.
ECLI:EU:C:1994:114
61993CC0069
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
Important legal notice
61993C0069
European Court reports 1994 Page I-02355
Opinion of the Advocate-General
Mr President, Members of the Court, 1. These joined cases are concerned with two references from the Pretura Circondariale di Roma, Castelnuovo di Porto Division, for a preliminary ruling on the compatibility of Italian Law No 558 of 28 July 1971 (1) with Articles 30 to 36 of the EC Treaty.
The Italian rules on the closure of shops
Facts and questions submitted for a preliminary ruling
Answer to the questions
7. The first question is concerned with the compatibility of national legislation on the closure of shops, such as the Italian legislation, with Article 30 of the EC Treaty. Clearly swayed by the arguments put forward by Punto Casa and PPV, the Pretura suggests in its questions and in the grounds of the order for reference that the Italian legislation (a) may lead to a fall in imports of products from other Member States and (b) is not based on social grounds since it does not prohibit working on Sundays and public holidays. In addition, it emphasizes that the legislation in question (c) affects large stores more severely than other categories of traders.
Conclusion
10. In conclusion, I propose that the Court answer the questions submitted by the Pretura Circondariale di Roma as follows: Article 30 of the EC Treaty must be interpreted as not applying to national legislation on the closure of shops which, like the legislation at issue in this case, applies in the same manner to all traders (including those from other Member States) carrying on business within the national territory, which in law and, viewed as a whole, in fact has the same impact on the marketing of domestic products and those from other Member States and which, still viewed as a whole, does not hinder access to the market for imported products in any other way.
(*) Original language: Dutch. (1) - Published in the Official Journal of the Italian Republic No 200 of 9 August 1971. (2) - Article 6(1) and (2) of Law No 558. (3) - Article 6(3). (4) - Article 1(2)(a). (5) - Article 2(1) and (3). (6) - Article 3. (7) - Article 6(1). (8) - In particular, they may decide that groceries may open in the morning on the public holiday which is best suited for that purpose (see Article 1(2)(d)). (9) - Article 4. (10) - Joined Cases C-267/91 and C-268/91 [1993] ECR . (11) - Case C-292/92 [1993] ECR . (12) - See the judgment in Keck and Mithouard, at paragraph 13, and the Opinion of 16 March 1994, paragraph 22. (13) - Opinion of 16 March 1994, paragraph 26. (14) - Opinion of 16 March 1994, paragraph 21. (15) - Opinion of 16 March 1994, paragraph 23.