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):		61992J0024

	Název: Title:		JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF 30 MARCH 1993. PIERRE CORBIAU V ADMINISTRATION DES CONTRIBUTIONS. REFERENCE FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING: DIRECTEUR DES CONTRIBUTIONS - GRAND DUCHY OF LUXEMBURG. CONCEPT OF' COURT OR TRIBUNAL OF A MEMBER STATE' WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 177 OF THE EEC TREATY. CASE C-24/92.

	Publikace: Publication:		REPORTS OF CASES 1993 PAGES I-1277

	Předmět (klíčová slova): Keywords		FREE MOVEMENT OF WORKERS;

	Související předpisy: Corresponding acts:

	Odkaz na souvisejicí judikáty: Corresponding Judgements:		[485] Biehl · [249] Broekmeulen · [015] Costa · [xxx] Dorsch Consult Case C-54/96, judgement of 17 September 1997 · Politi Case 42/71 Politi v Italy [1971] ECR 1039


	Plný text: Fulltext:		Ne

Fakta:
Mr Corbiau, who is a Belgian national, works at Banque Paribas in Luxembourg. He lived in Luxembourg until 25 October 1990, on which date he transferred his residence to Belgium while remaining employed in Luxembourg. Formerly a resident taxpayer in Luxembourg, he now became a non-resident taxpayer. The final assessment of his tax duties for 1990 showed a substantial excess taxation. However, the tax authorities refused to repay the excessive amount, relying on a provision of the Luxembourg Income Tax Law. Under the said provision, amounts deducted by way of tax from the salaries and wages of employed persons who are resident taxpayers for only part of the year are to become the property of the Treasury, if such persons take up residence in the country or leave it during the course of the tax year.
Mr Corbiau made an application to the Directeur des Contributions Directes et des Accises (Director of Taxation and Excise Duties; “the Directeur des Contributions”) asking for a repayment of the overpaid taxes. The Directeur des Contributions is the head of the Direction des Contributions Directes et des Accises (Direct Taxes and Excise Duties Directorate). As such, he has an organizational link to the departments which made the tax assessment. Under the Income Tax Law, the Directeur des Contributions may in individual cases grant full or partial remission of taxes owed to the State which it would be inequitable to collect having regard to the particular case. Against the decision of the Directeur des Contributions, the taxpayer has recourse to the courts; in that case, the Directeur des Contributions is a party to the proceedings.
In his application, Mr Corbiau relied, in particular, on the Court’s judgement in
Biehl
( [485]). Being uncertain as to how that judgement was to be applied to the matter before him, the Directeur des Contributions stayed the proceedings and under Article 177 of the Treaty made a reference for a preliminary ruling to the Court of Justice.

Názor soudu a komentář:
The Court holds that the reference is inadmissible because the Directeur des Contributions is not a “court or a tribunal” within the meaning of Article 177 of the Treaty.
The “court or tribunal” referred to in Article 177 of the Treaty is a concept of Community law and thus has to be interpreted autonomously rather than with reference to the national legal systems of the Member States. Whether a body is a court or a tribunal for the purposes of Article 177 of the Treaty is for the Court to decide (
Politi
). The concept presupposes, in particular, that the “court or tribunal” is “an authority which is acting as a third party in relation to the authority which adopted the decision forming the subject-matter of the proceedings” (for further determination of the concept, see e.g. [249]
Broekmeulen
; [015]
Costa;
[xxx]
Dorsch Consult
).
This is not the case for the Directeur des Contributions who has an organizational link to the department which made the tax assessment. His role as a party rather than a “court or tribunal” is further emphasized by the fact that the Directeur des Contributions becomes a party if proceedings before the courts are being instituted.

Shrnutí (Summary of the Judgment):
THE CONCEPT OF A COURT OF TRIBUNAL, WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 177 OF THE TREATY, IS A CONCEPT OF COMMUNITY LAW AND BY ITS VERY NATURE CAN EMBRACE ONLY AUTHORITIES ACTING AS A THIRD PARTY IN RELATION TO THE AUTHORITY WHICH ADOPTED THE DECISION UNDER APPEAL. THE DIRECTOR OF THE REVENUE SERVICES OF A MEMBER STATE HEARING A TAXPAYER' S COMPLAINT DOES NOT ACT AS SUCH A THIRD PARTY BECAUSE A CLEAR ORGANIZATIONAL LINK EXISTS BETWEEN HIM AND THE DEPARTMENT WHICH MADE THE DISPUTED TAX ASSESSMENT.

Plný text judikátu (Entire text of the Judgment):