This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62013CN0133
Case C-133/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 18 March 2013 — Staatssecretaris van Economische Zaken, Staatssecretaris van Financiën, other party: Q
Case C-133/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 18 March 2013 — Staatssecretaris van Economische Zaken, Staatssecretaris van Financiën, other party: Q
Case C-133/13: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 18 March 2013 — Staatssecretaris van Economische Zaken, Staatssecretaris van Financiën, other party: Q
OJ C 171, 15.6.2013, p. 13–13
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
15.6.2013 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 171/13 |
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 18 March 2013 — Staatssecretaris van Economische Zaken, Staatssecretaris van Financiën, other party: Q
(Case C-133/13)
2013/C 171/25
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Raad van State
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants:
|
Staatssecretaris van Economische Zaken, |
|
Staatssecretaris van Financiën |
Defendant: Q
Questions referred
1. |
Does the importance of the conservation of national natural heritage and cultural heritage, as addressed in the Natuurschoonwet 1928 (Law on nature protection 1928), constitute an overriding reason in the public interest which justifies a scheme whereby the application of an exemption from gift tax (recovery facility) is limited to estates situated in the Netherlands? |
2. |
|
3. |
If question 2(a), question 2(b) or question 2(c) must be answered in the negative, should the principle of sincere cooperation, as laid down in Article 4(3) of the TEU, considered in conjunction with Article 167(2) of the TFEU, be interpreted as meaning that, when a Member State requests another Member State to provide assistance with the investigation of whether an immovable property situated in that other Member State may be designated as an estate for the purposes of a law which has as its aim the conservation and protection of national natural heritage and cultural heritage, the requested Member State is obliged to provide that assistance? |
4. |
Can a restriction on the free movement of capital be justified by invoking the need to guarantee effective fiscal controls, if it appears that the only risk to effectiveness of those controls is the need for national authorities to travel to another Member State for the period of 25 years referred to in Article 7(1) of the Natuurschoonwet 1928 in order to carry out the necessary controls there? |