Reports of Cases

2007 I-02271

Subject-matter

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Högsta domstolen – Interpretation of Article 49 EC – National legislation not providing for an action challenging the non-conformity of a legislative provision with higher-ranking legal rules – Right of individuals to effective judicial protection of rights which they derive from the Community legal order

Systematic classification scheme

Citations of case-law or legislation

References in grounds of judgment

• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 10 : paragraph 38
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 49 : paragraphs 30, 32, 36, 65
• Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (2000) -A47 : paragraph 37
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -33/76 : paragraphs 38, 39, 43
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -45/76 : paragraphs 38, 39, 41, 43
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -106/77 : paragraph 38
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -158/80 : paragraphs 40, 41
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -222/84 : paragraph 37
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -222/86 : paragraphs 37, 61
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -143/88 : paragraph 79
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -213/89 : paragraphs 38, 41, 67
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -340/89 : paragraph 61
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -87/90 : paragraph 42
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -312/93 : paragraphs 38, 39, 54
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -465/93 : paragraph 79
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -226/99 : paragraph 67
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -424/99 : paragraph 37
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -453/99 : paragraphs 39, 43
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -50/00 : paragraphs 37, 42
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -13/01 : paragraphs 39, 42, 43
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -467/01 : paragraphs 37, 43
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -453/03 : paragraph 79

Operative part

• Interprets : EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 49

Opinion

• EU Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 6 -P2 : point 38
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 49 : points 20, 23, 25, 57, 60
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 230 : point 94
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 234 : point 94
  
• EC Treaty (Amsterdam), Article 242 : point 94
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -33/76 : point 32
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -106/77 : points 27, 33
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -135/77 : point 55
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -158/80 : point 32
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -116/84 : point 42
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -314/85 : point 93
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -157/86 : point 55
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -222/86 : point 35
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -143/88 : points 66 - 68, 80, 93
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -106/89 : points 29, 55
  
• Court of Justice - Opinion C -213/89 : point 92
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -213/89 : points 27, 35, 56, 63, 64, 67, 68, 72, 76, 92, 93
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -221/89 : point 64
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -340/89 : point 35
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -87/90 : points 27, 35
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -91/92 : points 49, 55
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -334/92 : point 55
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -312/93 : points 34, 36, 49
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -465/93 : points 93, 95
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -479/93 : point 49
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -343/96 : point 42
  
• Court of Justice - Order C -393/96 : points 82 - 84
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -412/96 : point 42
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -185/97 : point 27
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -240/98 : point 55
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -462/99 : point 55
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -253/00 : points 28, 53
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -13/01 : point 37
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -397/01 : point 55
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -263/02 : point 44
  
• Court of Justice - Judgment C -344/04 : point 93
  

Dates

Date of the lodging of the application initiating proceedings

• 05/12/2005

Date of the Opinion

• 30/11/2006

Date of the hearing

Information not available

Date of delivery

13/03/2007

References

Publication in the Official Journal

Application: OJ C 36 from 11.02.2006, p.23

Judgment: OJ C 95 from 28.04.2007, p.9

Name of the parties

Unibet

Notes on Academic Writings

1. Simon, Denys: Modalités de la protection provisoire, Europe 2007 Mai Comm. nº 128 p.9-10 (FR)
2. Broussy, Emmanuelle ; Donnat, Francis ; Lambert, Christian: Actualité du droit communautaire. Autonomie procédurale des Etats membres, L'actualité juridique ; droit administratif 2007 p.1119-1120 (FR)
3. Schmied, Frédéric: L'accès des particuliers au juge de la légalité - L'apport de l'arrêt Unibet, Journal des tribunaux / droit européen 2007 p.166-170 (FR)
4. Groussot, Xavier ; Wenander, Henrik: Self-standing Actions for Judicial Review and the Swedish Factortame: Case C-432/05, Unibet (London) Ltd and Unibet (International) Ltd v Justitiekanslern [2007] n.y.r., Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of March 13, 2007, Civil Justice Quarterly 2007 p.376-388 (EN)
5. Blumann, Claude: Le juge national, gardien menotté de la protection juridictionnelle effective en droit communautaire, La Semaine Juridique - édition générale 2007 I 175 p.13-19 (FR)
6. Mok, M.R.: Nederlandse jurisprudentie ; Uitspraken in burgerlijke en strafzaken 2007 nº 376 (NL)
7. Skotnicka, Eliza: Przesłanki zastosowania środka tymczasowego przez sąd krajowy w świetle wspólnotowej zasady efektywności - glosa do wyroku ETS z 13.03.2007 r. w sprawie C-432/05 Unibet (Londyn) Ltd i Unibet (International) Ltd przeciwko Justitiekanslern, Europejski Przegląd Sądowy 2007 Vol. 8 p.52-58 (PL)
8. De Waele, H.C.F.J.A. ; Schutgens, R.J.B.: Administratiefrechtelijke beslissingen ; Rechtspraak bestuursrecht 2007 nº 301 (NL)
9. Senden, L.A.J.: Unibet en de Europese inkadering van nationale procesautonomie, Ars aequi 2007 p.523-528 (NL)
10. Lindner, Josef Franz: Bayerische Verwaltungsblätter 2007 p.591-593 (DE)
11. Anagnostaras, Georgios: The quest for an effective remedy and the measure of judicial protection afforded to putative Community law rights, European Law Review 2007 p.727-739 (EN)
12. Schmauch, Magnus: EG-Domstolens dom i Unibet-målet - ett nationellt perspektiv, Europarättslig tidskrift 2007 p.691-708 (SV)
13. Poli, Maria Daniela: Sindacato concreto di conformità e integrazione multi-direzionale, Diritto pubblico comparato ed europeo 2007 p.1487-1494 (IT)
14. Mitsolidou, A.: Evropaion Politeia 2007 p.666-672 (EL)
15. Arnull, Anthony: Common Market Law Review 2007 p.1763-1780 (EN)
16. Lebeau, Lydia: Revue des affaires européennes 2007-08 p.135-151 (FR)
17. Donnat, Francis: Chronique annuelle 2007 de jurisprudence communautaire, Revue juridique de l'Economie publique 2008 nº 655 p.9-10 (FR)
18. Van Waeyenberge, Arnaud ; Pecho, Peter: L'arrêt Unibet et le traité de Lisbonne - un pari sur l'avenir de la protection juridictionnelle effective, Cahiers de droit européen 2008 p.123-156 (FR)
19. Bo, Giovanni: La pronuncia della Corte di giustizia nella causa Unibet tra principio di autonomia processuale e principio di non discriminazione, Rivista trimestrale di diritto e procedura civile 2008 p.1065-1078 (IT)
20. Díez-Picazo, Luis María: La sentencia Unibet y el principio de autonomía procesal, Noticias de la Unión Europea 2008 nº 287 p.91-93 (ES)
21. Andersson, Torbjörn: Abstrakt lagprövning - en aspekt på Unibetmålet, Festskrift till Johan Hirschfeldt (Iustus Förlag AB, Uppsala) 2008 p.19-31 (SV)
22. Popova, Zhasmin: Прилагане на правото на ЕС на национално равнище, Юридически свят 2015 n° 1 p.11-26 (BG)

Procedural Analysis Information

Source of the question referred for a preliminary ruling

Högsta domstolen - Sweden

Subject-matter

• Principles, objectives and tasks of the Treaties
  
• Freedom to provide services
  

Provisions of national law referred to

Regeringsformen (1974:152), 11 kap. 2§, 7§, 14§ Rättegångsbalk, given Särö den 18 juli 1942, given Särö den 18 juli 1942, 13 kap. 1§, 2§, 15 kap. 1§, 2§, 3§, 7§ Lotterilag (1994:1000), 38-45§§, 48§, 52§, 54§, 59§ Förvaltningsprocesslag (1971:291), 28§

Provisions of international law referred to

Information not available

Procedure and result

• Reference for a preliminary ruling
  

Formation of the Court

grande chambre (Cour)

Judge-Rapporteur

Lenaerts

Advocate General

Sharpston

Language(s) of the Case

• Swedish
  

Language(s) of the Opinion

• English