Europe’s top judges delivered another blow to state-run gambling monopolies yesterday when they found in favour of a Liverpool-based licensed bookmaker, Stanleybet International, and against the Italian Government.

The European Court of Justice ruled in the Placanica case that preventing sports bookmakers in one EU country from operating in another violates European rules on the freedom to provide services across national borders.

Adrian Morris, Stanleybet International’s deputy managing director, described it as an “explicit condemnation” of the Italian restrictions and a “ringing endorsement” of a previous ruling.

“Today’s verdict proves what we have said all along: consumers in Europe deserve, and are legally entitled under Article 49 of the Treaty, to a choice in where they place bets,” he said.

The ruling, which had been eagerly awaited by the gambling industry, endorses a similar judgment by the Luxem-bourg-based court in 2003 when it ruled in the Gambelli case that the sector had to respect EU rules. It should also strengthen the European Commission’s hand in its battle against EU governments, which are jealously guarding state gambling monopolies because of the valuable income they bring national treasuries.

Last year, Charlie McCreevy, the Internal Market Commissioner, started legal proceedings against ten EU countries, including France, Germany and Italy. In the coming weeks he will have to decide whether to pursue these as far as the European Court.

Analysts at Deutsche Bank said that the decision was a “positive step” because it showed that other countries “also appear to break the rules”.

In particular, the ruling could affect France which is taking an increasingly tough attitude towards foreign gaming companies. French authorities have recently summoned a number of online gambling executives, including John Anderson, the former chief executive of 888 Holdings, for questioning about their activities.

After the ruling, the European Betting Association (EBA) called for the abolition of gambling monopolies and the introduction of open and fair competition for licensed and regulated operators.

However, analysts at Arbuthnot, a UK broker, sounded a cautionary note saying that although the ruling recognises that any licensing regime or monopoly is technically in breach of EU rules, the restrictive aspects of those regimes are acceptable if they are designed to protect the public interest and/or prevent crime.

Paul Leyland, Arbuthnot’s gaming analyst said: “The ruling makes flagrant, blunt-in-strument protectionism more difficult but a more subtle approach could easily produce the same results and yet comply with EU guidance.

“The key danger for offshore operators is that protectionist member states will simply become more sophisticated, and therefore more effective, in their restrictive practices as antiquated laws and regulations are ‘modernised’.”

The case was referred to the Luxembourg court in 2004 when three operators, including Massimilliano Placanica, who worked on behalf of Stanleybet International, appeared before an Italian tribunal accused of pursuing the organised activity of collecting bets without the required police authorisation.

In Italy, the collection of bets requires a licence and police authorisation. The Italian tribunal asked the European Court whether the Italian legislation was compatible with the EU’s principles of freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services.

Fair bet

How shares in British gambling companies performed after yesterday’s European Court of Justice decision:

— 888 Holdingsup 7p to 103p

—Ladbrokes up 9p to 405p

—PartyGamingup 1p to 35p

—Sportingbet up 2p to 51p

—William Hill up 1p to 619p

Times Recommends

• Lies and cover-up at MG Rover exposed by report
• High oil prices push manufacturing costs up
• Primark founder steps down as chief executive