Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic.

JurisdictionEuropean Union
Celex Number61999CJ0439
ECLIECLI:EU:C:2002:14
Docket NumberC-439/99
Date15 January 2002
CourtCourt of Justice (European Union)
Procedure TypeRecours en constatation de manquement - non fondé
EUR-Lex - 61999J0439 - EN 61999J0439

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 15 January 2002. - Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic. - Failure to fulfil obligations - Infringement of Articles 52 and 59 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 43 EC and 49 EC) - Retention of certain national and regional rules regarding trade fairs, markets and exhibitions. - Case C-439/99.

European Court reports 2002 Page I-00305


Summary
Parties
Grounds
Decision on costs
Operative part

Keywords

1. Freedom to provide services - Restrictions in the area of the organisation of trade fairs - No justification - Not permissible

(EC Treaty, Arts 59, 61, 63 and 64 (now, after amendment, Arts 49 EC, 51 EC, 52 EC and 53 EC) and Arts 60, 65 and 66 (now Arts 50 EC, 54 EC and 55 EC))

2. Freedom of movement for persons - Freedom of establishment - Freedom to provide services - Restrictions in the area of the organisation of trade fairs - No justification - Not permissible

(EC Treaty, Arts 52, 54, 56, 57, 59, 61, 63 and 64 (now, after amendment, Arts 43 EC, 44 EC, 46 EC, 47 EC, 49 EC, 51 EC, 52 EC and 53 EC) and Arts 55, 58, 60, 65 and 66 (now Arts 45 EC, 48 EC, 50 EC, 54 EC and 55 EC))

Summary

1. A Member State which introduces, without justification relating to overriding requirements relating to the public interest, restrictions on freedom to provide services, by retaining in force provisions which:

- require trade-fair organisers to obtain official recognition;

- require trade-fair organisers to have a permanent national or local headquarters, establishment or organisation;

- require trade-fair organisers to have a particular legal form or status, thereby excluding other categories of operators;

- require the business of trade-fair organisers to be carried out on an exclusive basis;

- require trade-fair organisers to operate on a not-for-profit basis;

- require that trade fairs be held periodically;

- require trade events to be organised in conformity with objectives set by a region as part of its regional planning;

- require compliance with particularly strict time-limits in the trade fair administrative authorisation procedure;

- prohibit the organisation of trade fairs other than those included on the official calendar,

fails to fulfil its obligations under Article 59 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 49 EC), Article 60 of the Treaty (now Article 50 EC), Articles 61, 63 and 64 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 51 EC, 52 EC and 53 EC) and Articles 65 and 66 of the Treaty (now Articles 54 EC and 55 EC).

( see paras 26-34, 42 and operative part 1 )

2. A Member State which introduces, without justification relating to overriding requirements relating to the public interest, restrictions on freedom to provide services and freedom of establishment, by retaining in force provisions which:

- make administrative appointments for trade-fair organisers subject to the involvement of public authorities or local bodies of some other kind;

- make the activity of trade-fair organisers subject to the inclusion among the founders or members of at least one local territorial institution;

- make the organisation of trade fairs subject to the involvement of bodies made up of operators already in the territory concerned for the purposes of authorisation of fairs,

fails to fulfil its obligations under Article 59 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 49 EC), Article 60 of the Treaty (now Article 50 EC), Articles 61, 63 and 64 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 51 EC, 52 EC and 53 EC) and Articles 65 and 66 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 43 EC and 44 EC), Article 55 of the Treaty (now Article 45 EC), Articles 56 and 57 of the Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 46 EC and 47 EC), and Article 58 of the Treaty (now Article 48 EC).

( see paras 36-42 and operative part 2 )

Parties

In Case C-439/99,

Commission of the European Communities, represented by E. Traversa and M. Patakia, acting as Agents, assisted by A. Cevese, Avvocato, with an address for service in Luxembourg,

applicant,

v

Italian Republic, represented by U. Leanza, acting as Agent, assisted by D. Del Gaizo, Avvocato dello Stato, with an address for service in Luxembourg,

defendant,

APPLICATION for a declaration that

- by retaining the following provisions:

- Article 2, first paragraph, and Article 7 of Royal Decree-Law No 454 of 29 January 1934;

- Article 2, first paragraph, of Presidential Decree No 7 of 15 January 1972;

- Article 2, paragraphs 4, 6 and 7, of Presidential Decree No 390 of 18 April 1994;

- Article 4 of Regional Law No 40 of Liguria of 14 July 1978;

- Article 6, paragraph 1(e), (f), (g) and (h), Article 6, paragraph 4, and Article 7 of Regional Law No 35 of Veneto of 2 August 1988;

- Article 2, sixth paragraph, Article 4, first indent, Article 6, third and fourth paragraphs and Article 10, third paragraph, (a), of Regional Law No 16 of the Marches of 12 March 1979;

- Article 4, Article 5, sixth paragraph, (a) and (c), Article 6, first paragraph, Article 8, first and second paragraphs, and Article 16, first paragraph, of Regional Law No 43 of Emilia-Romagna of 26 May 1980;

- Article 4, paragraph 1(c), Article 4, paragraph 2, and Article 15, paragraph 3, of Regional Law No 45 of Lombardy of 29 April 1980;

- Article 3, Article 4 and Article 8, last paragraph, of Regional Law No 10 of Friuli Venezia Giulia of 23 February 1981;

- Article 2, last paragraph, and Article 6 of Regional Law No 75 of Abruzzo of 13 November 1980, and

- Article 3, Article 5, Article 6, third and fourth paragraphs, Article 12 and Article 19, first paragraph, of Provincial Law No 35 of the Autonomous Province of Trento of 2 September 1978,

the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 59 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 49 EC), Article 60 of the EC Treaty (now Article 50 EC), Articles 61, 63 and 64 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 51 EC, 52 EC and 53 EC) and Articles 65 and 66 of the EC Treaty (now Articles 54 EC and 55 EC), and that

- by retaining the following provisions:

- Article 3 of Presidential Decree No 7 of 15 January 1972;

- Article 2(c) and (d), Article 3, first paragraph, (b) and (c), and Article 5, first paragraph, (a), of Regional Law No 12 of Liguria of 3 November 1972;

- Article 8, paragraph 1(d) of Regional Law No 35 of Veneto of 2 August 1988;

- Article 6, third paragraph, points 3 and 4, Article 7, Article 8, second paragraph, and Article 11, first paragraph, of Regional Law No 43 of Emilia-Romagna of 26 May 1980;

- Article 5, paragraphs 2 and 5, Article 10, paragraph 4, Article 11, paragraphs 2 and 3, and Article 15, paragraph 1, of Regional Law No 45 of Lombardy of 29 April 1980;

- Article 5, Article 13, Article 14 and Article 15, first paragraph, (a), of Regional Law No 10 of Friuli Venezia Giulia of 23 February 1981;

- Article 7 of Regional Law No 75 of Abruzzo of 13 November 1980, and

- Articles 6, 7 and 23 of Provincial Law No 35 of the Autonomous Province of Trento of 2 September 1978,

the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 59 to 61 and 63 to 66 of the Treaty and under Articles 52 and 54 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 43 EC and 44 EC), Article 55 of the EC Treaty (now Article 45 EC), Articles 56 and 57 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 46 EC and 47 EC) and Article 58 of the EC Treaty (now Article 48 EC),

THE COURT (Fifth Chamber),

composed of: P. Jann, President of the Chamber, S. von Bahr (Rapporteur), A. La Pergola, L. Sevón and M. Wathelet, Judges,

Advocate General: S. Alber,

Registrar: R. Grass,

having regard to the report of the Judge-Rapporteur,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 29 May 2001,

gives the following

Judgment

Grounds

1 By application lodged at the Court Registry on 17 November 1999 the Commission of the European Communities brought an action under Article 226 EC for a declaration that

- by retaining the following provisions:

- Article 2, first paragraph, and Article 7 of Royal Decree-Law No 454 of 29 January 1934;

- Article 2, first paragraph, of Presidential Decree No 7 of 15 January 1972;

- Article 2, paragraphs 4, 6 and 7, of Presidential Decree No 390 of 18 April 1994;

- Article 4 of Regional Law No 40 of Liguria of 14 July 1978;

- Article 6, paragraph 1(e), (f), (g) and (h), Article 6, paragraph 4, and Article 7 of Regional Law No 35 of Veneto of 2 August 1988;

- Article 2, sixth paragraph, Article 4, first indent, Article 6, third and fourth paragraphs and Article 10, third paragraph, (a), of Regional Law No 16 of the Marches of 12 March 1979;

- Article 4, Article 5, sixth paragraph, (a) and (c), Article 6, first paragraph, Article 8, first and second paragraphs, and Article 16, first paragraph, of Regional Law No 43 of Emilia-Romagna of 26 May 1980;

- Article...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
61 cases
  • Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Sweden.
    • European Union
    • Court of Justice (European Union)
    • 6 October 2009
    ...non, même dans la mesure où l’État concerné ne conteste pas le manquement (voir, en ce sens, arrêts du 15 janvier 2002, Commission/Italie, C‑439/99, Rec. p. I‑305, point 20, et du 23 février 2006, Commission/Allemagne, C‑43/05, point 11). 54 Il convient de relever que le Royaume de Suède re......
  • European Commission v Czech Republic.
    • European Union
    • Court of Justice (European Union)
    • 14 January 2010
    ...bringing an action for failure to fulfil obligations are satisfied (Case C‑362/90 Commission v Italy [1992] ECR I‑2353, paragraph 8; Case C‑439/99 Commission v Italy [2002] ECR I‑305, paragraph 8; and Case C‑98/04 Commission v UnitedKingdom [2006] ECR I-4003, paragraph 16). 26 It is clear f......
  • Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic.
    • European Union
    • Court of Justice (European Union)
    • 14 December 2006
    ...28); Säger, précité (point 14); Vander Elst, précité (point 15); Analir e.a., précité (point 22); du 15 janvier 2002, Commission/Italie (C‑439/99, Rec. p. I‑305, point 26), et Commission/Autriche, précité (point 40). Voir également, en ce qui concerne la jurisprudence relative aux activités......
  • Heinrich Bauer Verlag BeteiligungsGmbH v Finanzamt für Großunternehmen in Hamburg.
    • European Union
    • Court of Justice (European Union)
    • 10 January 2008
    ...apartado 42. 9 – Véanse las referencias citadas en la nota anterior. 10 – En especial, sentencias de 15 de enero de 2002, Comisión/Italia (C‑439/99, Rec. p. I‑305), apartado 22, y de 17 de octubre de 2002, Payroll y otros (C‑79/01, Rec. p. I‑8293), apartado 26. 11 – Sentencias de 14 de febr......
  • Get Started for Free
4 books & journal articles
  • Contenido esencial y abuso de las libertades comunitarias
    • European Union
    • Las cláusulas anti-abuso específicas tributarias frente a las libertades de circulación de la Unión Europea
    • 7 November 2010
    ...STJUE de 3 de octubre de 2006, Fidium Finanz AG (C-425/04, Rec. p. I-9521), aps. 43-44. [255] STJUE de 15 de enero de 2002, Comisión/Italia (C-439/99, Rec. p. I-305), ap. [256] STJUE de 3 de octubre de 2006, Fidium Finanz AG (C-425/04), ap. 49. [257] HERRERA MOLINA, P.M., en «STJCE 12.9.200......
  • La Directiva Bolkenstein y la Ley paraguas: ¿Legitima el fin cualesquiera medios para la reconversión del Estado «autoritativo»?
    • European Union
    • Revista Española de Derecho Europeo No. 32, October 2009
    • 1 October 2009
    ...1 de febrero de 2001, Mac Queen y otros, C-108/ 96; 17 de octubre de 2002, Payroll y otros, C-79/01; 15 de enero de 2002, Comisión/ Italia, C-439/99; 5 de octubre de 2004, CaixaBank France/ Ministère de l’Economie des Finances et de l’Industrie, C-442/02; 30 de marzo de 2006, Servizi Ausili......
  • Introduction. Directive 98/34/EC, an instrument of transparency at the service of the Internal Market
    • European Union
    • Directive 93/34/EC : an instrument of co-operation between institutions and enterprises
    • 1 January 2007
    ...originating in the Contracting Parties’ and not, consequently, to products simply marketed there. [9] OJ L 35, 13.2.1996, p. 1. [10] Case C-439/99 Commission v Italy - ‘Trade Fairs’ [2002] ECR [11] Case C-76/90 ‘Dennemeyer’ [1991] ECR I-4221; Case C-369/96 ‘Arblade’ [1999] ECR I-8453 and Ca......
  • Jurisprudencia analizada
    • European Union
    • Las cláusulas anti-abuso específicas tributarias frente a las libertades de circulación de la Unión Europea
    • 7 November 2010
    ...I-11619). STJUE de 8 de marzo de 2001, Metallgesellschaft y otros (C-397/98, Rec. p. I-1727). STJUE de 15 de enero de 2002, Comisión/Italia (C-439/99, Rec. p. I-305). STJUE de 5 de noviembre de 2002, Überseering (C-208/00, Rec. p. I-9919). STJUE de 21 de noviembre de 2002, X e Y (C-436/00, ......