62019CO0468_INF
Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 13 February 2020 – Regione Veneto
(Case C-468/19) (
1
)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Historical vehicles – Non-uniform tax treatment within a Member State – Purely internal situation – Manifest inadmissibility)
1.
Questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Jurisdiction of the Court – Limits – Request for interpretation of provisions of EU law manifestly inapplicable in the dispute in the main proceedings – Tax provisions – Internal taxation – Tax regime providing for a tax on the possession of motor vehicles with an exemption for vintage vehicles – Classification as internal taxation and not as quantitative restriction, measure having equivalent effect or tax having equivalent effect to a customs duty – Inapplicability of Articles 30 and 34 to 36 TFEU – Manifest inadmissibility
(Arts 30, 34 to 36, 110 and 267 TFEU; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 53(2))
(see paras 26-28, 32-36, 46, 47, operative part)
2.
Questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Jurisdiction of the Court – Limits – Request for interpretation of provisions of EU law manifestly inapplicable in the dispute in the main proceedings – Inapplicability of Directives 2000/53 and 2014/60 in a dispute concerning a vintage vehicle located on national territory – Manifest inadmissibility
(Art. 267 TFEU; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 53(2); European Parliament and Council Directive 2000/53, Recital 10; European Parliament and Council Directive 2014/60, Arts 1 and 2, point 1)
(see paras 29-31, 46, 47, operative part)
3.
Questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Jurisdiction of the Court – Limits – Request for interpretation of provisions of EU law manifestly inapplicable in the dispute in the main proceedings – Tax provisions – Internal taxation – Prohibition of discrimination between imported products and similar domestic products – Tax at issue does not constitute discrimination – Inapplicability of Article 110 TFEU – Manifest inadmissibility
(Arts 110 and 267 TFEU; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 53(2))
(see paras 37-39, 46, 47, operative part)
4.
Questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Admissibility – Need to provide the Court with sufficient information on the factual and legislative context – Scope of the obligation in the context of the fundamental freedoms – Question raised concerning a dispute confined within a single Member State – No indication as to how the requested interpretation is necessary to resolve the dispute – Manifest inadmissibility
(Art. 267 TFEU; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Arts 53(2) and 94)
(see paras 41-43, 46, 47, operative part)
5.
Questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Jurisdiction of the Court – Limits – Request for interpretation of provisions of EU law manifestly inapplicable in the dispute in the main proceedings – Inapplicability of Directive 2000/43 in a dispute not concerning discrimination on the basis of race or ethnic origin – Manifest inadmissibility
(Art. 267 TFEU; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Art. 53(2); Council Directive 2000/43, Art. 1)
(see paras 44, 46, 47, operative part)
6.
Questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Admissibility – Request not explaining why reference to the Court necessary – Manifest inadmissibility
(Art. 2 TEU; Art. 267 TFEU; Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Arts 53(2) and 94)
(see paras 45-47_operative part)
Operative part
The request for a preliminary ruling made by the Commissione tributaria regionale del Veneto (Regional Tax Court for Veneto, Italy), by decision of 10 June 2019, is manifestly inadmissible.
(
1
)	OJ C 357, 21.10.2019.