Keywords

++++

Free movement of goods - Quantitative restrictions - Measures having equivalent effect - Legislation prohibiting the marketing of sex articles from certain outlets - Whether permissible

(EEC Treaty, Art. 30)

Summary

Article 30 of the Treaty should be construed as meaning that national provisions prohibiting the sale of lawful sex articles from unlicensed sex establishments do not constitute a measure having an effect equivalent to a quantitative restriction on imports.

(The Court' s reply in this judgment is the same as that in its judgment in Case C-23/89 Quietlynn Ltd and Richards v Southend Borough Council [1990] ECR I-3059, which involved substantially identical questions.)

Parties

In Case C-350/89,

REFERENCE to the Court under Article 177 of the EEC Treaty by the High Court of Justice, Queen' s Bench Division, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between

Sheptonhurst Limited

and

Newham Borough Council,

on the interpretation of Articles 30 and 36 of the EEC Treaty,

THE COURT (Fourth Chamber),

composed of: M. Díez de Velasco, President of the Chamber, C.N. Kakouris and P.J.G. Kapteyn, Judges,

(The grounds of the judgment are not reproduced.)

in answer to the question referred to it by the High Court, Queen' s Bench Division, by order of 12 October 1988, hereby rules:

Operative part

Article 30 of the EEC Treaty should be construed as meaning that national provisions prohibiting the sale of lawful sex articles from unlicensed sex establishments do not constitute a measure having an effect equivalent to a quantitative restriction on imports.