«(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Freedom to provide services – Non-discrimination – Articles 12 EC and 49 EC – Admission to museums, monuments, galleries, archaeological digs, parks and gardens classified as public monuments – Preferential rates granted by local or decentralised State authorities)»

Community law – Principles – Equal treatment – Discrimination on grounds of nationality – Admission to museums, monuments, galleries, archaeological digs, parks and gardens classified as public monuments – Advantageous rates granted by local or decentralised State authorities only in favour of nationals and persons resident within the territory of those authorities who are aged over 60 or 65 years – Not permissible – Whether justifiable – No justification (Arts 12 and 49 EC) By allowing advantageous rates for admission to museums, monuments, galleries, archaeological digs, parks and gardens classified as public monuments, granted by local or decentralised State authorities only in favour of nationals and persons resident within the territory of those authorities running the cultural sites in question who are aged over 60 or 65 years, and by excluding from such advantages tourists who are nationals of other Member States and non-residents who fulfil the same objective age requirements, a Member States fails to fulfil its obligations under Articles 12 EC and 49 EC.Such rules are prohibited by the above provisions and cannot be justified either by economic considerations relating to the costs involved in running cultural sites or on grounds of cohesion of the tax system, since there is no direct link between any taxation and the application of preferential rates for admission to the sites concerned.see paras 12, 19-25, 28, operative part

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Sixth Chamber) 16 January 2003 (1)

((Failure to fulfil obligations – Free movement of services – Non-discrimination – Articles 12 EC and 49 EC – Admission to museums, monuments, galleries, archaeological digs, parks and gardens classified as public monuments – Preferential rates granted by local or decentralised State authorities))

In Case C-388/01,

applicant,

v

defendant,

APPLICATION for a declaration that, by allowing discriminatory, advantageous rates for admission to museums, monuments, galleries, archaeological digs, parks and gardens classified as public monuments, granted by local or decentralised State authorities only in favour of Italian nationals and persons resident within the territory of those authorities running the cultural sites in question, who are aged over 60 or 65 years, and by excluding from such advantages tourists who are nationals of other Member States and non-residents who fulfil the same objective age requirements, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 12 EC and 49 EC,

THE COURT (Sixth Chamber),,

composed of: J.-P. Puissochet, President of the Chamber, R. Schintgen, V. Skouris, N. Colneric and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues (Rapporteur), Judges,

Advocate General: C. Stix-Hackl,

having regard to the report of the Judge-Rapporteur,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 10 October 2002,

gives the following

....

....

On those grounds,

THE COURT (Sixth Chamber),

hereby:

Puissochet

Schintgen

Skouris

Colneric

Cunha Rodrigues

Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 16 January 2003.

R. Grass

J.-P. Puissochet

Registrar

President of the Sixth Chamber