{"id":10142,"date":"2026-09-21T14:46:59","date_gmt":"2026-09-21T12:46:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/tigges.legal\/discussion-of-a-recent-decision-by-patrick-j-kaatz\/"},"modified":"2026-09-21T14:48:16","modified_gmt":"2026-09-21T12:48:16","slug":"discussion-of-a-recent-decision-by-patrick-j-kaatz","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/tigges.legal\/en\/discussion-of-a-recent-decision-by-patrick-j-kaatz\/","title":{"rendered":"Discussion of a Recent Decision by Patrick J. Kaatz"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In the current issue of GRUR-Prax 2026, 605, <a href=\"https:\/\/tigges.legal\/en\/team-member\/patrick-j-kaatz-ll-m\/\" data-type=\"team-mitglied\" data-id=\"1192\">Patrick J. Kaatz, LL.M.<\/a>, discusses a recent decision by the Higher Administrative Court of Hamburg.<br\/><br\/>In this decision, the Higher Administrative Court addresses the antitrust assessment of the State Treaty on Gambling and formulates questions for a preliminary ruling to the European Court of Justice. It seeks clarification from the Court regarding, <\/p>\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>whether the granting of permits on a state-by-state basis is consistent with antitrust law,<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>whether state-run lotteries provide services of general economic interest and<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>whether the so-called principle of coherence applies in this context.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">These questions referred for a preliminary ruling could have enormous implications for state monopolies, as they raise a fundamental issue: May the state actually seek to achieve legislative objectives that would justify an antitrust exemption, or may it merely cite them as a matter of course in order to benefit from the exemption?<br\/><br\/>In his analysis, Patrick J. Kaatz explains this ruling, examines its practical implications, and offers a prediction as to how the European Court of Justice might rule.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In the current issue of GRUR-Prax 2026, 605, Patrick J. Kaatz, LL.M., discusses a recent ruling by the Higher Administrative Court of Hamburg.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":9,"featured_media":10140,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[89,201],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-10142","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","category-publications"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/tigges.legal\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10142","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/tigges.legal\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/tigges.legal\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tigges.legal\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/9"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tigges.legal\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10142"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/tigges.legal\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10142\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10143,"href":"https:\/\/tigges.legal\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10142\/revisions\/10143"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tigges.legal\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/10140"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/tigges.legal\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10142"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tigges.legal\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10142"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tigges.legal\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10142"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}