Odbor kompatibility s právem ES
Úřad vlády ČR
I S A P
Informační Systém pro Aproximaci Práva
Databáze č. 17 : Databáze judikatury
ă Odbor kompatibility s právem ES, Úřad vlády ČR - určeno pouze pro potřebu ministerstev a ostatních ústředních orgánů

Číslo (Kód CELEX):
Number (CELEX Code):		61976J0074
Název:
Title: 		JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF 22 MARCH 1977. IANNELLI AND VOLPI S.P.A. V DITTA PAOLO MERONI. PRELIMINARY RULING REQUESTED BY THE PRETORE DI MILANO. CASE 74-76.
Publikace:
Publication:		REPORTS OF CASES 1977 PAGES 0557 - 0580
Předmět (klíčová slova):
Keywords		COMPETITION;STATE AIDS;FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS;QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS;MEASURES HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT;TAXATION;
Související předpisy:
Corresponding acts:		157E030;157E092;157E093;157E095
Odkaz na souvisejicí judikáty:
Corresponding Judgements:
Plný text:
Fulltext:		Ne

Fakta:


Názor soudu a komentář:


Shrnutí (Summary of the Judgment):
1. THE INTENTION OF THE TREATY IN PROVIDING THROUGH ARTICLE 93 FOR AID TO BE KEPT UNDER CONSTANT REVIEW AND SUPERVISED BY THE COMMISSION IS THAT THE FINDING THAT AN AID MAY BE INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE COMMON MARKET IS TO BE DETERMINED, SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY THE COURT, BY MEANS OF AN APPROPRIATE PROCEDURE WHICH IT IS THE COMMISSION' S RESPONSIBILITY TO SET IN MOTION. THE PARTIES CONCERNED CANNOT THEREFORE SIMPLY, ON THE BASIS OF ARTICLE 92 ALONE, CHALLENGE THE COMPATIBILITY OF AN AID WITH COMMUNITY LAW BEFORE NATIONAL COURTS OR ASK THEM TO DECIDE AS TO ANY INCOMPATIBILITY WHICH MAY BE THE MAIN ISSUE IN ACTIONS BEFORE THEM OR MAY ARISE AS A SUBSIDIARY ISSUE.

2. ARTICLE 30 OF THE TREATY HAS DIRECT EFFECT AND CREATES, AT THE END OF THE TRANSITIONAL PERIOD AT THE LATEST, FOR ALL PERSONS SUBJECT TO COMMUNITY LAW, RIGHTS WHICH NATIONAL COURTS MUST PROTECT.

3. THE AIDS REFERRED TO IN ARTICLES 92 AND 93 OF THE TREATY DO NOT AS SUCH FALL WITHIN THE FIELD OF APPLICATION OF THE PROHIBITION OF QUANTITATIVE RESTRICTIONS ON IMPORTS AND MEASURES HAVING EQUIVALENT EFFECT LAID DOWN BY ARTICLE 30. THE ASPECTS OF AID, WHICH ARE NOT NECESSARY FOR ATTAINMENT OF ITS OBJECT OR FOR ITS PROPER FUNCTIONING AND WHICH CONTRAVENE THIS PROHIBITION MAY FOR THAT REASON BE HELD TO BE INCOMPATIBLE WITH THIS PROVISION.

4. THE FACT THAT AN ASPECT OF AID, WHICH IS NOT NECESSARY FOR THE ATTAINMENT OF ITS OBJECT OR FOR ITS PROPER FUNCTIONING, IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH A PROVISION OF THE TREATY OTHER THAN ARTICLES 92 AND 93 DOES NOT IN FACT INVALIDATE THE AID AS A WHOLE OR FOR THAT REASON VITIATE BY REASON OF ILLEGALITY THE SYSTEM OF FINANCING THE SAID AID.

5. SINCE ARTICLE 95 OF THE TREATY REFERS TO INTERNAL TAXATION OF ANY KIND THE FACT THAT A TAX OR LEVY IS COLLECTED BY A BODY GOVERNED BY PUBLIC LAW OTHER THAN THE STATE OR IS COLLECTED FOR ITS OWN BENEFIT AND IS A CHARGE WHICH IS SPECIAL OR APPROPRIATED FOR A SPECIFIC PURPOSE CANNOT PREVENT ITS FALLING WITHIN THE FIELD OF APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 95 OF THE TREATY. IN ORDER TO APPLY ARTICLE 95 OF THE TREATY NOT ONLY THE RATE OF DIRECT AND INDIRECT INTERNAL TAXATION ON DOMESTIC AND IMPORTED PRODUCTS BUT ALSO THE BASIS OF ASSESSMENT AND DETAILED RULES FOR LEVYING THE TAX MUST BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. AS SOON AS ANY DIFFERENCES IN THIS RESPECT RESULT IN THE IMPORTED PRODUCT BEING TAXED AT THE SAME STAGE OF PRODUCTION OR MARKETING AT A HIGHER RATE THAN THE SIMILAR DOMESTIC PRODUCT THE PROHIBITION OF ARTICLE 95 IS INFRINGED.

6. IT IS NEVERTHELESS FOR THE NATIONAL COURT WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF ITS OWN LEGAL SYSTEM TO DECIDE WHETHER THE WHOLE OF ANY INTERNAL TAXATION WHICH IS DISCRIMINATORY WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 95 OR ONLY THAT PART OF IT WHICH EXCEEDS THE TAX ASSESSED ON THE DOMESTIC PRODUCT IS TO BE REGARDED AS NOT PAYABLE.

Plný text judikátu (Entire text of the Judgment):