# C_2016038EN.01002102.xml

| 1.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 38/21 |
| -------- | -- | -------------------------------------- | ------- |

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 21 October 2015 — J.J. de Lange v Staatssecretaris van Financiën

(Case C-548/15)

(2016/C 038/31)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: J.J. de Lange

Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Financiën

Questions referred

| 1. | Must Article 3 of Council Directive 2000/78/EC( 1 ) of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation be interpreted as meaning that that provision applies to a concession contained in tax legislation on the basis of which study costs may, under certain conditions, be deducted from the taxable income? |
| -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ |

In the event that the Court answers the first question referred in the negative:

| 2. | Must the principle of non-discrimination on the grounds of age, as a general principle of EU law, be applied to a tax concession on the basis of which training expenditure is only deductible under certain circumstances, even when that concession falls outside the material scope of Directive 2000/78/EC and when that arrangement does not implement EU law? |
| -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |

If the answer to the first or the second question referred is in the affirmative:

| 3. | (a)
Can differences in treatment which are contrary to the principle of non-discrimination on the grounds of age as a general principle of EU law be justified in a way provided for in Article 6 of Directive 2000/78/EC? (b)
If not, what criteria apply to the application of that principle or to the justification of a distinction based on age? | (a) | Can differences in treatment which are contrary to the principle of non-discrimination on the grounds of age as a general principle of EU law be justified in a way provided for in Article 6 of Directive 2000/78/EC? | (b) | If not, what criteria apply to the application of that principle or to the justification of a distinction based on age? |
| --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| (a) | Can differences in treatment which are contrary to the principle of non-discrimination on the grounds of age as a general principle of EU law be justified in a way provided for in Article 6 of Directive 2000/78/EC? | | | | |
| (b) | If not, what criteria apply to the application of that principle or to the justification of a distinction based on age? | | | | |

| 4. | (a)
Should Article 6 of Directive 2000/78/EC and/or the principle of non-discrimination on the grounds of age be interpreted as justifying a difference in treatment on the grounds of age if the ground for that difference in treatment only relates to some of the cases affected by that distinction? (b)
Can a distinction based on age be justified by the view of the legislator that beyond a certain age a tax concession need not be available because it is the ‘personal responsibility’ of the person claiming it to achieve the objective pursued by the concession? | (a) | Should Article 6 of Directive 2000/78/EC and/or the principle of non-discrimination on the grounds of age be interpreted as justifying a difference in treatment on the grounds of age if the ground for that difference in treatment only relates to some of the cases affected by that distinction? | (b) | Can a distinction based on age be justified by the view of the legislator that beyond a certain age a tax concession need not be available because it is the ‘personal responsibility’ of the person claiming it to achieve the objective pursued by the concession? |
| --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| (a) | Should Article 6 of Directive 2000/78/EC and/or the principle of non-discrimination on the grounds of age be interpreted as justifying a difference in treatment on the grounds of age if the ground for that difference in treatment only relates to some of the cases affected by that distinction? | | | | |
| (b) | Can a distinction based on age be justified by the view of the legislator that beyond a certain age a tax concession need not be available because it is the ‘personal responsibility’ of the person claiming it to achieve the objective pursued by the concession? | | | | |

---

( 1 )  OJ 2000 L 303, p. 16.

---