|
10.12.2011 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 362/6 |
Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 20 October 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Vestre Landsret — Denmark) — Danfoss A/S, Sauer-Danfoss ApS v Skatteministeriet
(Case C-94/10) (1)
(Indirect taxes - Excise duties on mineral oils - Incompatibility with European Union law - Non-repayment of excise duty to purchasers of goods to whom the excise duty has been passed on)
2011/C 362/08
Language of the case: Danish
Referring court
Vestre Landsret
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: Danfoss A/S, Sauer-Danfoss ApS
Defendant: Skatteministeriet
Re:
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Vestre Landsret — Interpretation of European Union law on recovery of sums unduly paid and the conditions for compensation for losses caused to individuals — Excise duties levied contrary to the system of harmonised excise duties put in place by Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 on the general arrangements for products subject to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such products (OJ 1992 L 76, p. 1) and Council Directive 92/81/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the harmonisation of the structures of excise duty on mineral oils (OJ 1992 L 316, p. 12) — Unlawful excise duty paid to the State by oil companies which sold oils subject to excise duty whilst incorporating the excise duty into the price of the goods — Failure by the State to repay the excise duty to purchasers of the oils on the ground that they had not paid it to the State — Refusal to compensate for the losses caused to the purchasers of the oils by the unlawful excise duty due to the lack of immediate loss and direct causal link between the infringement of the State’s obligation and the loss suffered
Operative part of the judgment
The rules of European Union law must be construed as meaning that:
|
1. |
a Member State may oppose a claim for reimbursement of a duty unduly paid, brought by the purchaser to whom that duty has been passed on, on the ground that it is not the purchaser who has paid the duty to the tax authorities, provided that the purchaser is able, on the basis of national law, to bring a civil action against the taxable person for recovery of the sum unduly paid and provided that the reimbursement, by that taxable person, of the duty unduly paid is not virtually impossible or excessively difficult; |
|
2. |
a Member State may reject a claim for damages brought by a purchaser to whom a duty unduly paid has been passed on by the taxable person, on the ground that there is no direct causal link between the levying of that duty and the damage suffered, provided that the purchaser is able, on the basis of national law, to bring that claim against the taxable person and provided that the compensation, by that taxable person, of the damage suffered by the purchaser is not virtually impossible or excessively difficult. |