Case C-415/02: Action brought on 19 November 2002 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Kingdom of Belgium
Date: 2003-01-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Belgium, European Commission, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, free movement of capital, indirect tax, securities, stock-exchange transaction

C 19/16

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25.1.2003

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Verwaltungsger-
ichtshof by order of that Court of 6 November 2002 in
the case of Spedition Ulustrans, Uluslararasi Nakliyat ve.
Tic. A.S. Istanbul against Finanzlandesdirektion Oberös-
terreich

(Case C-414/02)

(2003/C 19/27)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of the Verwaltungsgerichtsh-
of (Administrative Court) of 6 November 2002, received at the
Court Registry on 19 November 2002, for a preliminary ruling
in the case of Spedition Ulustrans, Uluslararasi Nakliyat ve.
Tic. A.S. Istanbul against Finanzlandesdirektion Oberösterreich
(Regional Finance Directorate for Upper Austria) on the
following questions:

Does Paragraph 79(2) of the Zollrechtsdurchführungsgesetz
(Act to implement customs law, under which an employer or
undertaking incurs liability for a customs debt at the same
time as the employee or other person contracted by the
undertaking incurs liability for the debt, if that person has, in
the discharge of his employer’s or the undertaking’s affairs,
acted unlawfully with regard to customs obligations), widen
the meaning of the term ‘customs debtor’ in a manner that is
contrary to Article 202(3) of the Customs Code and therefore
incompatible with Community law?

new securities issued when a company or investment
fund is being set up or following the completion of an
increase in capital or during a loan issue,

the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations
under Article 11 of Council Directive 69/335/EEC of
17 July 1969 concerning indirect taxes on the raising of
capital (1);

— Order the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The taxes referred to in the forms of order sought are at
variance with Article 11 of the Directive in so far as they are
imposed on the delivery to the subscriber and/or the issue of
new securities. In those cases, the derogation provided for in
Article 12(1)(a) of the Directive, which allows Member States
to charge duties on the transfer of securities, is not applicable
because such a ‘transfer’ presupposes the existence of a
previous owner of the securities in question.

(1) OJ English Special Edition 1969(II), p. 412.

Action brought on 19 November 2002 by the Com-
the
mission of

the European Communities against

Kingdom of Belgium

(Case C-415/02)

(2003/C 19/28)

An action against the Kingdom of Belgium was brought
before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on
19 November 2002 by the Commission of the European
Communities, represented by R. Lyal and Ch. Giolito, acting
as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The Commission of the European Communities claims that
the Court should:

— Rule that:

by imposing the ‘tax on stock-exchange transactions’ on
applications made in Belgium for new securities issued
when a company or investment fund is being set up or
following the completion of an increase in capital or
during a loan issue;

by imposing the ’tax on the delivery of securities to the
holder’ on the substantive issue to the holder of securities
relating to Belgian or foreign public funds, in the case of

Action brought on 19 November 2002 by the
Commission of the European Communities against the
Hellenic Republic

(Case C-417/02)

(2003/C 19/29)

An action against the Hellenic Republic was brought before
the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 19 No-
vember 2002 by the Commission of the European Communi-
ties, represented by Maria Patakia, Legal Adviser in its Legal
Service.

The Commission claims that the Court should:

(a)

declare that,

— by enacting and retaining in force Article 3(1)(c) and

(2) of Presidential Decree 107/93, and