# C_2022276EN.01000801.xml

| 18.7.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 276/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.7.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 276/8

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Como (Italy) lodged on 11 May 2022 — Gabel Industria Tessile SpA, Canavesi SpA v A2A Energia SpA and Others

(Case C-316/22)

(2022/C 276/12)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Como

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Gabel Industria Tessile SpA, Canavesi SpA

Defendants: A2A Energia SpA, Energit SpA, Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli

Questions referred

| 1. | In general, does the system of sources of European Union law and, specifically, the third paragraph of Article 288 TFEU preclude the disapplication by a national court, in a dispute between private individuals, of a provision of national law that is contrary to a clear, precise and unconditional provision of a directive that has not been transposed or has been incorrectly transposed, thereby imposing an additional obligation on an individual, where that constitutes, according to the national legal system (Article 14(4) of Legislative Decree No 504/1995), a prerequisite for the latter to be able to assert against the State the rights conferred on him or her by that directive? |
| --- | --- |

1.

In general, does the system of sources of European Union law and, specifically, the third paragraph of Article 288 TFEU preclude the disapplication by a national court, in a dispute between private individuals, of a provision of national law that is contrary to a clear, precise and unconditional provision of a directive that has not been transposed or has been incorrectly transposed, thereby imposing an additional obligation on an individual, where that constitutes, according to the national legal system (Article 14(4) of Legislative Decree No 504/1995), a prerequisite for the latter to be able to assert against the State the rights conferred on him or her by that directive?

| 2. | Does the principle of effectiveness preclude national legislation (Article 14(4) of Legislative Decree No 504/1995) that does not allow a final consumer to seek reimbursement of undue tax directly from the State, but grants him or her only the option of bringing a civil action for recovery against the taxable person, who alone is entitled to obtain reimbursement from the tax authority, where the sole ground for the unlawfulness of the tax — namely the fact that it is contrary to a [Union] directive — can be relied on only in the relationship between the person liable to pay and the tax authority, but not in the relationship between the person liable to pay and the final consumer, thus effectively preventing the application of the reimbursement or, in order to ensure compliance with that principle, should the final consumer be recognised as having direct standing in such a case to bring an action against the Treasury, as a case where it is impossible or excessively difficult to obtain from the supplier a refund of the tax unduly paid? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Does the principle of effectiveness preclude national legislation (Article 14(4) of Legislative Decree No 504/1995) that does not allow a final consumer to seek reimbursement of undue tax directly from the State, but grants him or her only the option of bringing a civil action for recovery against the taxable person, who alone is entitled to obtain reimbursement from the tax authority, where the sole ground for the unlawfulness of the tax — namely the fact that it is contrary to a [Union] directive — can be relied on only in the relationship between the person liable to pay and the tax authority, but not in the relationship between the person liable to pay and the final consumer, thus effectively preventing the application of the reimbursement or, in order to ensure compliance with that principle, should the final consumer be recognised as having direct standing in such a case to bring an action against the Treasury, as a case where it is impossible or excessively difficult to obtain from the supplier a refund of the tax unduly paid?

---