# C_2004118EN.01003203.xml

| 30.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 118/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 118/32

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Commissione Tributaria Provinciale di Genova by order of that court of 11 February 2004 in the case of Unicredito Italiano SpA and Agenzia Entrate Ufficio Genova (1)

1

(Case C-148/04)

(2004/C 118/60)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the Commissione Tributaria Provinciale di Genova (Provincial Tax Commission, Genoa) of 11 February 2004, received at the Court Registry on 23 March 2004, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Unicredito Italiano SpA and Agenzia Entrate Ufficio Genova on the following questions:

| 1. | Is Commission Decision 2002/581/EC (2) of 11 December 2001 (OJ 2002 L 184, p. 27) invalid and incompatible with Community law, in that the provisions of the Ciampi Law and the related legislative decree regarding banks are compatible with the Common Market, contrary to the opinion of the European Commission, or do they in any case fall within the scope of the derogations provided for by Article 87(3)(b) and (c) of the EC Treaty? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is Commission Decision 2002/581/EC (2) of 11 December 2001 (OJ 2002 L 184, p. 27) invalid and incompatible with Community law, in that the provisions of the Ciampi Law and the related legislative decree regarding banks are compatible with the Common Market, contrary to the opinion of the European Commission, or do they in any case fall within the scope of the derogations provided for by Article 87(3)(b) and (c) of the EC Treaty?

2

| 2. | In particular, is Article 4 of the above-mentioned decision invalid and incompatible with Community law, in that the Commission:






  a) | failed in its duty to provide adequate reasons in accordance with Article 253 of the EC Treaty; and/or |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

In particular, is Article 4 of the above-mentioned decision invalid and incompatible with Community law, in that the Commission:

a)

failed in its duty to provide adequate reasons in accordance with Article 253 of the EC Treaty; and/or

| b) | infringed the principle of legitimate expectations; and/or |
| --- | --- |

b)

infringed the principle of legitimate expectations; and/or

| c) | infringed the principle of proportionality? |
| --- | --- |

c)

infringed the principle of proportionality?

| 3. | In any event, does a correct interpretation of Article m87 et seq. of the EC Treaty, Article 14 of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 and the general principles of Community law, in particular those mentioned in the grounds of the order for reference, preclude the application of Article 1 of Decree Law 282 of 24 December 2002 (converted into Law No 27 of 21 February 2003 enacting ‘Urgent provisions regarding Community and fiscal measures, revenues and accounting procedures’ in Suppl. ord. No 29 to Gazzetta Ufficiale No 44 of 22 February 2003)? |
| --- | --- |

3.

In any event, does a correct interpretation of Article m87 et seq. of the EC Treaty, Article 14 of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 and the general principles of Community law, in particular those mentioned in the grounds of the order for reference, preclude the application of Article 1 of Decree Law 282 of 24 December 2002 (converted into Law No 27 of 21 February 2003 enacting ‘Urgent provisions regarding Community and fiscal measures, revenues and accounting procedures’ in Suppl. ord. No 29 to Gazzetta Ufficiale No 44 of 22 February 2003)?

---

(1)  OJ L 184, 13.7.2002, p. 27.

1

(2)  OJ L 83, 27.3.1999, p. 1.

2

---