«(Free movement of goods – Alarm systems and networks – Interpretation of Articles 28 EC and 30 EC – Interpretation of Directives 73/23/EEC, 89/336/EEC and 1999/5/EEC – Compatibility of national legislation making marketing subject to a prior approval procedure)»
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Sixth Chamber)8 May 2003 (1)
((Free movement of goods – Alarm systems and networks – Interpretation of Articles 28 EC and 30 EC – Interpretation of Directives 73/23/EEC, 89/336/EEC and 1999/5/EEC – Compatibility of national legislation making marketing subject to a prior approval procedure))
and
THE COURT (Sixth Chamber),,
after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of:
having regard to the Report for the Hearing,
after hearing the oral observations of ATRAL SA, represented by E. de Cannart d’Hamale and B. Raevens, the Belgian State, represented by L. Defalque, of the French Government, represented by R. Loosli-Surrans, acting as Agent, and the Commission, represented by X. Lewis, acting as Agent, assisted by B. van de Walle de Ghelcke, at the hearing on 3 October 2002,
after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 12 December 2002,
gives the following
On those grounds,
THE COURT (Sixth Chamber),
Puissochet
Schintgen
Skouris
Macken
Cunha Rodrigues
R. Grass
J.-P. Puissochet
Registrar
President of the Sixth Chamber