EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document C2004/273/31
Case C-384/04: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Court of Appeal (England and Wales) (Civil Division), by order of that court dated 30 July 2004, in the case of (1) Commissioners of Customs and Excise (2) H.M. Attorney-General against Federation of Technological Industries and 53 others
Case C-384/04: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Court of Appeal (England and Wales) (Civil Division), by order of that court dated 30 July 2004, in the case of (1) Commissioners of Customs and Excise (2) H.M. Attorney-General against Federation of Technological Industries and 53 others
Case C-384/04: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Court of Appeal (England and Wales) (Civil Division), by order of that court dated 30 July 2004, in the case of (1) Commissioners of Customs and Excise (2) H.M. Attorney-General against Federation of Technological Industries and 53 others
IO C 273, 6.11.2004, p. 18–19
(ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
6.11.2004 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 273/18 |
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Court of Appeal (England and Wales) (Civil Division), by order of that court dated 30 July 2004, in the case of (1) Commissioners of Customs and Excise (2) H.M. Attorney-General against Federation of Technological Industries and 53 others
(Case C-384/04)
(2004/C 273/31)
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by an order of the Court of Appeal (England and Wales) (Civil Division) dated 30 July 2004, which was received at the Court Registry on 4 September 2004, for a preliminary ruling in the case of (1) Commissioners of Customs and Excise (2) H.M. Attorney-General against Federation of Technological Industries and 53 others, on the following questions:
|
1. |
Does Art. 21.3 of Council Directive 77/388/EEC (1) as amended by Council Directive 2000/65/EC permit Member States to provide that any person may be made jointly and severally liable for payment of tax with any person who is made so liable by Art. 21.1 or 21.2, subject only to the general principles of Community law namely that such a measure must be objectively justifiable, rational, proportionate and legally certain? |
|
2. |
Does Art. 22(8) of the Directive permit Member States to provide that any person may be made so liable or to provide that one person may be required to provide security for tax due from another subject only to the aforesaid general principles? |
|
3. |
If the answer to question 1 is no, what limits, other than those imposed by the aforesaid general principles, are there on the power conferred by Art. 21.3? |
|
4. |
If the answer to question 2 is no, what limits, other than those imposed by the aforesaid general principles, are there on the power conferred by Art. 22(8)? |
|
5. |
Are member states precluded by the Directive as amended from providing for joint and several liability of taxpayers or from requiring one taxpayer to provide security for tax due from another in order to prevent abuse of the VAT system and the protection of revenues properly due under that system, if such measures comply with the aforesaid general principles? |
(1) Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (OJ L 145, 13.6.1977, p. 1).