Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search
You are here

Document 62017TN0018

Case T-18/17: Action brought on 13 January 2017 — Czech Republic v Commission

OJ C 70, 6.3.2017, p. 25–26 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

6.3.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 70/25

Action brought on 13 January 2017 — Czech Republic v Commission

(Case T-18/17)

(2017/C 070/35)

Language of the case: Czech

Parties

Applicant: Czech Republic (represented by: M. Smolek and J. Vláčil, Agents)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—

annul Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1867 of 20 October 2016 amending the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 3199/93 on the mutual recognition of procedures for the complete denaturing of alcohol for the purposes of exemption from excise duty; and

—

order the European Commission to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on two pleas in law.

1.

First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 13(2) of the Treaty on European Union and of Article 27(3) and (4) of Council Directive 92/83/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the harmonization of the structures of excise duties on alcohol and alcoholic beverages. By adopting the contested Regulation the Commission is alleged to have interfered in the Czech national requirements for the complete denaturing of alcohol, despite the fact that the Czech Republic had not sent any communication to the Commission under Article 27(3) of Directive 92/83 and the Commission had repeatedly, on the other hand, communicated that it disagreed with that approach. Under Article 27(4) of Directive 92/83, it is however not permissible to interfere in a Member States national requirements for the complete denaturing of alcohol without a communication from that Member State.

2.

Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 27(1)(a) of Directive 92/83, since eurodenaturant 1:1:1 does not meet the purpose of that provision in so far as it does not provide sufficient guarantees in the fight against tax evasion. Eurodenaturant 1:1:1 is a very weak denaturing mixture, and alcohol completely denatured with that mixture may easily be misused for the manufacture of alcoholic beverages.
Top