# C_2014245EN.01000402.xml

| 28.7.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 245/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.7.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 245/4

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tatabányai Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság (Hungary) lodged on 23 April 2014 — István Tivadar Szabó v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Közép-dunántúli Regionális Adó Főigazgatósága

(Case C-204/14)

2014/C 245/06

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Referring court

Tatabányai Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: István Tivadar Szabó

Applicant:

Defendant: Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Közép-dunántúli Regionális Adó Főigazgatósága

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | In administrative-law proceedings the object of which is judicial review, in the context of an action brought by the individual concerned, of a decision adopted by an administrative authority of the Member State, is the national court obliged to consider whether the provisions of national law on which the administrative decision is founded are contrary to any provision of EU law which is directly applicable and which is also relevant in the case concerned? |
| --- | --- |

1.

In administrative-law proceedings the object of which is judicial review, in the context of an action brought by the individual concerned, of a decision adopted by an administrative authority of the Member State, is the national court obliged to consider whether the provisions of national law on which the administrative decision is founded are contrary to any provision of EU law which is directly applicable and which is also relevant in the case concerned?

| 2. | If question 1 is answered in the affirmative, does that mean that the national court is obliged to do so of its own motion or only in the event of one of the parties expressly pleading an infringement of EU law? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If question 1 is answered in the affirmative, does that mean that the national court is obliged to do so of its own motion or only in the event of one of the parties expressly pleading an infringement of EU law?

| 3. | May Articles 26(2) TFEU, 35 TFEU and 56 TFEU be interpreted as precluding rules of a Member State such as those in Paragraphs 24/C and 24/D of the General Tax Law where, under such rules, a Hungarian company which carries on business partly in other Member States of the European Union may not appoint as a senior executive a Hungarian citizen who has previously held a senior executive position in another Hungarian company which carries on business in the internal market, solely on the ground that other Hungarian company has accumulated a tax debt of a certain level, when the accumulation of that debt is not attributable to that Hungarian citizen in his capacity as a former senior executive? |
| --- | --- |

3.

May Articles 26(2) TFEU, 35 TFEU and 56 TFEU be interpreted as precluding rules of a Member State such as those in Paragraphs 24/C and 24/D of the General Tax Law where, under such rules, a Hungarian company which carries on business partly in other Member States of the European Union may not appoint as a senior executive a Hungarian citizen who has previously held a senior executive position in another Hungarian company which carries on business in the internal market, solely on the ground that other Hungarian company has accumulated a tax debt of a certain level, when the accumulation of that debt is not attributable to that Hungarian citizen in his capacity as a former senior executive?

---