The EU sought a declaration that, because of the way in which long-standing Italian law permitted extrajudicial debt recovery by creditors against entities established in other member states, Italy had failed to fulfill its treaty obligations. The EU had not passed directly applicable legislation in the area of extrajudicial debt recovery. Italian law provided that, in order to recover debts extra-judicially, a creditor needed to obtain a license from the Questore (the local police authority). This license permitted action only in the Italian province where it was issued. Further, the Questore could place such conditions on the grant of a license as it thought appropriate. The license holder needed to display a list of all services provided and their cost on its business premises so that the Questore could confirm that prices for the services did not vary significantly. Further, license holders could not provide banking or credit services. Only banks and financial institutions listed with the ministry of the treasury could provide these services. The Commission brought an action against Italy, as it considered these requirements to be in restraint of commerce among the member states. The Commission asked the Court of Justice to clarify the degree of discretion that member states retain vis-à-vis the European Commission in inter-member state economic matters. Are Italy's licensing requirements an interference with the free movement of services? What impediments do they pose to such free movement? How should the ECJ decide this case?