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
(Case C-171/17) (<span class="super note-tag">1</span>)
((Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2006/123/EC - Articles 15 to 17 - Article 49 TFEU - Freedom of establishment - Article 56 TFEU - Freedom to provide services - National mobile payment system - Monopoly))
(2019/C 16/10)
Language of the case: Hungarian
Applicant: European Commission (represented by: V. Bottka and H. Tserepa-Lacombe, acting as Agents)
Defendant: Hungary (represented by: M.Z. Fehér and G. Koós, acting as Agents)
The Court:
1.Declares that, by instituting and maintaining in force the national mobile payment system governed by a nemzeti mobil fizetési rendszerről szóló 2011. évi CC. törvény (Law CC of 2011 on the national mobile payment system) and by 356/2012. (XII. 13.) Korm. rendelet a nemzeti mobil fizetési rendszerről szóló törvény végrehajtásáról (Governmental Decree No 356/2012 implementing the mobile payment system law), Hungary has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 15(2)(d) of Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market and Article 56 TFEU;
2.Dismisses the action as to the remainder;
3.Orders the European Commission and Hungary to bear their own costs.
(<span class="note"> <a id="ntr1-C_2019016EN.01000901-E0001" href="#ntc1-C_2019016EN.01000901-E0001">*1</a> </span>) OJ C 231, 17.7.2017.