News details

Betting, no collecting without double authorization

The Tuscan Administrative Court reiterates the prohibition on issuing the authorization pursuant to art. 88 Consolidated Law on Public Safety for the collection of bets in the absence of a concessionary title issued in Italy, since the foreign title is not valid.
The Second Section of the Tuscan Regional Administrative Court rejected the appeal of an operator, to whom the Police Headquarters had denied the issue of authorization for the data transmission activity in favor of an operator based in Malta. For administrative judges, in fact, the current legislation provides for a regime of the so-called 'double authorization', which contemplates the concession for the activation of the network by the Customs and Monopolies Agency and the license subsequently issued by the questore pursuant to art. 88 of the Consolidated Law on Public Security Laws, after verifying the existence of the subjective (for the applicant) and objective (relating to the premises where the activity is requested to authorize) required by law. This system, the administrative judges continue, is considered by the jurisprudence to be compatible with Community law as the so-called 'double track' concession-authorization system, which requires, for the exercise of betting collection activities, both the issue of a concession by the Ministry of Economy and Finance, and the authorization of public security pursuant to art. 88 of the Consolidated Law on Public Security (Council of State, opinion no. 137/2020; Cons. State, section III, 10 August 2018, no. 4905; id., 20 April 2015, no. 1992; id., 27 November 2013, n ° 5636 and 5637). The Supreme Court of Cassation, moreover, underline the Tuscan judges, has considered the provisions of art. 88 of the Consolidated Law on Public Security Laws "not in contrast with the Community principles of freedom of establishment and the free provision of services within the European Union, given that the national legislation rationally pursues control purposes for reasons of public order suitable for justify the national restrictions on the aforementioned community principles "(Criminal Court, section III, 12 January 2012, no. 7695)".