Case C‑331/13

Ilie Nicolae Nicula

v

Administraţia Finanţelor Publice a Municipiului Sibiu

and

Administraţia Fondului pentru Mediu

(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Sibiu)

‛Reference for a preliminary ruling — Repayment of taxes levied by a Member State in breach of EU law’

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber), 15 October 2014

1. Questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Jurisdiction of the Court — Limits — Questions which are manifestly irrelevant, hypothetical questions put in a context precluding a useful answer and questions bearing no relation to the purpose of the main proceedings — None — Admissibility

   (Art. 267 TFEU)

2. EU law — Rights conferred on individuals — Taxes levied in breach of EU law — Recovery of undue payments — Application of national law — Limits — National legislation making the repayment of a tax levied in breach of EU law subject to the condition that the amount of that tax is greater than the amount of a tax introduced subsequently — Not permissible

   (Art. 110 TFEU)

1.  See the text of the decision.

   (see paras 21, 23, 25)

2.  EU law precludes a system of repayment of a tax levied in breach of EU law which allows individuals to obtain repayment of that tax only to the extent that the amount of that tax exceeds that of a tax introduced subsequently.

   Such a system of repayment has the effect, in the case of a second hand vehicle imported from another Member State, of restricting or completely eliminating the requirement to repay the tax levied in breach of EU law, which perpetuates the discrimination resulting from that tax.

   In addition, the effect of that system is to exempt the national authorities from the requirement to take account of the interest payable to the taxpayer for the period between the date of the undue levying of the tax and the repayment thereof.

   Consequently, that system of repayment does not make it possible for individuals effectively to exercise their right under EU law to seek repayment of a tax levied in breach of EU law.

   (see paras 33, 35-39, operative part)

Case C‑331/13

Ilie Nicolae Nicula

v

Administraţia Finanţelor Publice a Municipiului Sibiu

and

Administraţia Fondului pentru Mediu

(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunalul Sibiu)

‛Reference for a preliminary ruling — Repayment of taxes levied by a Member State in breach of EU law’

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber), 15 October 2014

1. Questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Jurisdiction of the Court — Limits — Questions which are manifestly irrelevant, hypothetical questions put in a context precluding a useful answer and questions bearing no relation to the purpose of the main proceedings — None — Admissibility

   (Art. 267 TFEU)

2. EU law — Rights conferred on individuals — Taxes levied in breach of EU law — Recovery of undue payments — Application of national law — Limits — National legislation making the repayment of a tax levied in breach of EU law subject to the condition that the amount of that tax is greater than the amount of a tax introduced subsequently — Not permissible

   (Art. 110 TFEU)

1.  See the text of the decision.

   (see paras 21, 23, 25)

2.  EU law precludes a system of repayment of a tax levied in breach of EU law which allows individuals to obtain repayment of that tax only to the extent that the amount of that tax exceeds that of a tax introduced subsequently.

   Such a system of repayment has the effect, in the case of a second hand vehicle imported from another Member State, of restricting or completely eliminating the requirement to repay the tax levied in breach of EU law, which perpetuates the discrimination resulting from that tax.

   In addition, the effect of that system is to exempt the national authorities from the requirement to take account of the interest payable to the taxpayer for the period between the date of the undue levying of the tax and the repayment thereof.

   Consequently, that system of repayment does not make it possible for individuals effectively to exercise their right under EU law to seek repayment of a tax levied in breach of EU law.

   (see paras 33, 35-39, operative part)