CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 6 mai 2008

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sEB86A30B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s9FF10068 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s5CB9E8AB { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 108 May 2008 Ladbrokes Worldwide Betting v. Sweden - 27968/05 Decision 6.5.2008 [Section III] Article 6 Civil proceedings Article 6-1 Civil rights and obligations No right under domestic law to obtain a permit to provide betting and gaming services: inadmissible   The applicant, a UK based company, applied to the Government for a permit to provide betting and gaming services in Sweden under section   45 of the Lotteries Act. The Government rejected the application noting that betting and gaming in Sweden was essentially reserved for the State and that the profits arising from such activities should be for the benefit of the public or for public utility purposes. The applicant applied for judicial review of that decision to the Supreme Administrative Court and moved for withdrawal of certain judges from sitting in his case. The court rejected that motion and subsequently dismissed the applicant’s appeal, upholding the Government’s findings. The applicant complained of the lack of independence and impartiality of the Supreme Administrative Court. However, it was first necessary to establish whether there existed a right that could arguably be said to be recognised by Swedish law. Under the Lotteries Act, betting and gaming services depended on granting a permit generally reserved for Swedish non-profit making associations fulfilling certain requirements. Moreover, section   45 of that Act conferred on the Government the power to grant a permit to arrange lotteries whenever they considered it appropriate, without specifying how and when that power should be used. Given such unfettered discretion on the part of the public authority, the applicant could not claim to have an actual right that could be said to have been recognised under domestic law: incompatible ratione materiae.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes