EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62013CA0133

Case C-133/13: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 18 December 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State — Netherlands) — Staatssecretaris van Economische Zaken, Staatssecretaris van Financiën v Q (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Free movement of capital — Tax legislation — Gift tax — Exemption in respect of an ‘estate’  — No exemption in respect of property situated in the territory of another Member State)

IO C 65, 23.2.2015, p. 5–5 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

23.2.2015   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/5


Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 18 December 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State — Netherlands) — Staatssecretaris van Economische Zaken, Staatssecretaris van Financiën v Q

(Case C-133/13) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Free movement of capital - Tax legislation - Gift tax - Exemption in respect of an ‘estate’ - No exemption in respect of property situated in the territory of another Member State))

(2015/C 065/06)

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

Operative part of the judgment

Article 63 TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding legislation of a Member State, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, under which an exemption from gift tax relating to certain properties that are protected on account of their forming part of the national cultural and historical heritage is limited to those properties situated in the territory of that Member State, provided that that exemption is not excluded in the case of properties that may form part of the cultural and historical heritage of that Member State despite being located in the territory of another State.


(1)  OJ C 171, 15.6.2013.


Top