# C_2011046EN.01000201.xml

| 12.2.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 46/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.2.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 46/2

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court of the Slovak Republic lodged on 21 October 2010 — TANOARCH s.r.o. v Tax Directorate of the Slovak Republic

(Case C-504/10)

2011/C 46/02

Language of the case: Slovak

Referring court

Referring court

The Supreme Court of the Slovak Republic

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: TANOARCH s.r.o.

Applicant:

Defendant: Tax Directorate of the Slovak Republic

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Does Article 2(1) of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC (1) of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax permit a provision whereby a taxpayer may deduct, from his own tax liability, tax on goods and services which he uses for the purposes of his business as a taxpayer, if that tax has been charged to him by another inland taxpayer, on goods and services supplied or to be supplied, in circumstances where the plaintiff, in his capacity as co-applicant in respect of an invention on which a patent has yet to be granted, already owns, as a matter of law, the right independently to use the invention which is the subject-matter of the patent as a whole? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does Article 2(1) of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC (1) of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax permit a provision whereby a taxpayer may deduct, from his own tax liability, tax on goods and services which he uses for the purposes of his business as a taxpayer, if that tax has been charged to him by another inland taxpayer, on goods and services supplied or to be supplied, in circumstances where the plaintiff, in his capacity as co-applicant in respect of an invention on which a patent has yet to be granted, already owns, as a matter of law, the right independently to use the invention which is the subject-matter of the patent as a whole?

1

| 2. | Does the Sixth Directive permit the interpretation that a taxpayer’s existing legal right independently to use a patent results in the legal impossibility of using a service for supplies of goods and services as a taxpayer, and that this results in the legal consumption of the service acquired? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Does the Sixth Directive permit the interpretation that a taxpayer’s existing legal right independently to use a patent results in the legal impossibility of using a service for supplies of goods and services as a taxpayer, and that this results in the legal consumption of the service acquired?

| 3. | Is the abuse of a taxpayer’s right to deduct input VAT under the Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities of 21 February 2006, Case C-255/02 Halifax and Others, affected by the fact that, regarding the substance of the matter, the invention has not yet been registered as a patent and only parts thereof are operated? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Is the abuse of a taxpayer’s right to deduct input VAT under the Judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Communities of 21 February 2006, Case C-255/02 Halifax and Others, affected by the fact that, regarding the substance of the matter, the invention has not yet been registered as a patent and only parts thereof are operated?

Halifax and Others

---

(1)  OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1

1

---