This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62016CJ0519
Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 26 July 2017.
Superfoz - Supermercados Lda v Fazenda Pública.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Approximation of laws — Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 — Official controls of feed and food — Funding of official controls — Articles 26 and 27 — General taxation — Fees or charges — Charge on retail food outlets.
Case C-519/16.
Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 26 July 2017.
Superfoz - Supermercados Lda v Fazenda Pública.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Approximation of laws — Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 — Official controls of feed and food — Funding of official controls — Articles 26 and 27 — General taxation — Fees or charges — Charge on retail food outlets.
Case C-519/16.
Court reports – general
Case C‑519/16
Superfoz — Supermercados Lda
v
Fazenda Pública
(Request for a preliminary ruling
from the Tribunal Administrativo e Fiscal de Coimbra)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling — Approximation of laws — Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 — Official controls of feed and food — Funding of official controls — Articles 26 and 27 — General taxation — Fees or charges — Charge on retail food outlets)
Summary — Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber), 26 July 2017
Approximation of laws — Official controls of feed and food — Financing — Fees payable in relation to official controls — Charge on retail food outlets — Revenue from that charge not used specifically to fund official controls that have been caused by, or that are for the benefit of, the chargeable persons — Lawfulness
(European Parliament and Council Regulation No 882/2004, Arts 26 and 27)
Articles 26 and 27 of Regulation (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on official controls performed to ensure the verification of compliance with feed and food law, animal health and animal welfare rules, as amended by Regulation (EU) No 652/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014, must be interpreted as not precluding the imposition of a charge, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, on retail food outlets only, where the revenue from that charge is not used specifically to finance official controls that have been caused by, or that are for the benefit of, those chargeable persons.
(see para. 43, operative part)