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):		61979J0061
Název:
Title: 		JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF 27 MARCH 1980. AMMINISTRAZIONE DELLE FINANZE DELLO STATO V DENKAVIT ITALIANA S.R.L.. PRELIMINARY RULING REQUESTED BY THE TRIBUNALE CIVILE E PENALE, MILAN. PUBLIC HEALTH INSPECTION CHARGES - REPAYMENT OF SUMS PAID BUT NOT OWED. CASE 61-79.
Publikace:
Publication:		REPORTS OF CASES 1980 PAGES 1205
Předmět (klíčová slova):
Keywords		AGRICULTURE;MILK PRODUCTS;FREE MOVEMENT OF GOODS;CUSTOMS UNION;CHARGES HAVING AN EQUIVALENT EFFECT;COMPETITION;STATE AIDS;VETERINARY LEGISLATION;
Související předpisy:
Corresponding acts:		157E013;157E092;157E177
Odkaz na souvisejicí judikáty:
Corresponding Judgements:
Plný text:
Fulltext:		Ne

Fakta:


Názor soudu a komentář:


Shrnutí (Summary of the Judgment):
1. ARTICLE 13 (2) OF THE EEC TREATY COMPRISES A CLEAR AND PRECISE PROHIBITION, AS FROM THE END OF THE TRANSITIONAL PERIOD AT THE LATEST, IN OTHER WORDS AS FROM 1 JANUARY 1970, AND FOR ALL CHARGES HAVING AN EFFECT EQUIVALENT TO CUSTOMS DUTIES, ON THE COLLECTING OF THE SAID CHARGES, WHICH PROHIBITION LENDS ITSELF, BY ITS VERY NATURE, TO PRODUCING DIRECT EFFECTS IN THE LEGAL RELATIONS BETWEEN MEMBER STATES AND THEIR SUBJECTS. THESE EFFECTS IMPLY THAT, FROM THE END OF THE TRANSITIONAL PERIOD, APPLICATIONS DIRECTED AGAINST NATIONAL CHARGES HAVING AN EFFECT EQUIVALENT TO CUSTOMS DUTIES OR CLAIMS FOR REPAYMENT OF SUCH CHARGES MAY, ACCORDING TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES, BE BROUGHT BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES AND COURTS OF THE MEMBER STATES, EVEN IN RESPECT OF THE PERIOD BEFORE THAT CLASSIFICATION OF THOSE CHARGES FOLLOWS FROM AN INTERPRETATION GIVEN BY THE COURT OF JUSTICE UNDER ARTICLE 177 OF THE TREATY.

2. THE INTERPRETATION WHICH, IN THE EXERCISE OF THE JURISDICTION CONFERRED UPON IT BY ARTICLE 177, THE COURT OF JUSTICE GIVES TO A RULE OF COMMUNITY LAW CLARIFIES AND DEFINES WHERE NECESSARY THE MEANING AND SCOPE OF THAT RULE AS IT MUST BE OR OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN UNDERSTOOD AND APPLIED FROM THE TIME OF ITS COMING INTO FORCE. IT FOLLOWS THAT THE RULE AS THUS INTERPRETED MAY, AND MUST, BE APPLIED BY THE COURTS EVEN TO LEGAL RELATIONSHIPS ARISING AND ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE JUDGMENT RULING ON THE REQUEST FOR INTERPRETATION, PROVIDED THAT IN OTHER RESPECTS THE CONDITIONS ENABLING AN ACTION RELATING TO THE APPLICATION OF THAT RULE TO BE BROUGHT BEFORE THE COURTS HAVING JURISDICTION ARE SATISFIED. IT IS ONLY EXCEPTIONALLY THAT THE COURT MAY, IN APPLICATION OF THE GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF LEGAL CERTAINTY INHERENT IN THE COMMUNITY LEGAL ORDER AND IN TAKING ACCOUNT OF THE SERIOUS EFFECTS WHICH ITS JUDGMENT MIGHT HAVE, AS REGARDS THE PAST, ON LEGAL RELATIONSHIPS ESTABLISHED IN GOOD FAITH, BE MOVED TO RESTRICT FOR ANY PERSON C
ONCERNED THE OPPORTUNITY OF RELYING UPON THE PROVISION AS THUS INTERPRETED WITH A VIEW TO CALLING IN QUESTION THOSE LEGAL RELATIONSHIPS.

3. APPLYING THE PRINCIPLE OF CO-OPERATION LAID DOWN IN ARTICLE 5 OF THE EEC TREATY, IT IS THE COURTS OF THE MEMBER STATES WHICH ARE ENTRUSTED WITH ENSURING THE LEGAL PROTECTION WHICH SUBJECTS DERIVE FROM THE DIRECT EFFECT OF THE PROVISIONS OF COMMUNITY LAW.

4. IN THE ABSENCE OF COMMUNITY RULES CONCERNING THE CONTESTING OR THE RECOVERY OF NATIONAL CHARGES WHICH HAVE BEEN UNLAWFULLY DEMANDED OR WRONGFULLY LEVIED, IT IS FOR THE DOMESTIC LEGAL SYSTEM OF EACH MEMBER STATE TO LAY DOWN THE CONDITIONS IN WHICH TAXPAYERS MAY CONTEST THAT TAXATION OR CLAIM REPAYMENT THEREOF, PROVIDED THAT THOSE CONDITIONS ARE NO LESS FAVOURABLE THAN THE CONDITIONS RELATING TO SIMILAR APPLICATIONS OF A DOMESTIC NATURE AND THAT THEY DO NOT MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE IN PRACTICE TO EXERCISE THE RIGHTS CONFERRED BY THE COMMUNITY LEGAL ORDER. HOWEVER, COMMUNITY LAW DOES NOT REQUIRE AN ORDER FOR THE RECOVERY OF CHARGES IMPROPERLY LEVIED TO BE GRANTED IN CONDITIONS SUCH AS WOULD INVOLVE AN UNJUSTIFIED ENRICHMENT OF THOSE ENTITLED. THERE IS THEREFORE NOTHING, FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF COMMUNITY LAW, TO PREVENT NATIONAL COURTS FROM TAKING ACCOUNT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR NATIONAL LAW OF THE FACT THAT IT HAS BEEN POSSIBLE FOR CHARGES UNDULY LEVIED TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE PRICES OF THE UNDERTAKING LIABLE
FOR THE CHARGE AND TO BE PASSED ON TO THE PURCHASERS.

5. THE DUTY OF THE AUTHORITIES OF A MEMBER STATE TO REPAY TO TAXPAYERS WHO APPLY FOR SUCH REPAYMENT, IN ACCORDANCE WITH NATIONAL LAW, CHARGES OR DUES WHICH WERE NOT PAYABLE BECAUSE THEY WERE INCOMPATIBLE WITH COMMUNITY LAW DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN AID WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 92 OF THE EEC TREATY.

Plný text judikátu (Entire text of the Judgment):