Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2016:464
Date: 2016-06-21
Language of the case: Dutch
Court formation: Grand Chamber
Subject matter: Free movement of workers
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Belgium

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber), 21 June 2016 1. Questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Jurisdiction of the Court — Limits — Jurisdiction of the national court — Necessity of a question referred and relevance of the questions raised — Assessment by the national court (Art. 267 TFEU) 2. Questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Jurisdiction of the Court — Limits — Jurisdiction of the national court — Interpretation of national law (Art. 267 TFEU) 3. Questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Jurisdiction of the Court — Identification of the relevant aspects of EU law — Reformulation of the questions (Art. 267 TFEU) 4. Free movement of goods — Quantitative restrictions — Measures having equivalent effect — Legislation of a federated entity of a Member State requiring that the official language of that entity be used to draft invoices relating to cross-border transactions, failing which those invoices are to be declared null and void — Inadmissibility — Justification by reasons in the public interest — Promotion of an official language and preservation of the effectiveness of fiscal supervision — Absence — Disproportionate nature of that legislation (Art. 35 TFEU) 1. See the text of the decision. (see para. 23) 2. See the text of the decision. (see para. 25) 3. See the text of the decision. (see paras 28, 29) 4. Article 35 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a federal entity of a Member State which requires every undertaking that has its place of establishment within the territory of that entity to draw up all the details on invoices relating to cross-border transactions exclusively in the official language of that entity, failing which those invoices are to be declared null and void by the national courts of their own motion. Such legislation can be justified neither by the objective of promoting and encouraging the use of one of the official languages of a Member State nor by the need to protect the effectiveness of fiscal supervision, since it goes beyond what is necessary to attain those objectives and thus cannot therefore be regarded as proportionate. (see paras 47, 50, 51, 56, 57, operative part)