Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 25 September 2003 in Case C-437/01: Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic (Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Directives 92/12/EEC and 92/81/EEC — Tax on lubricating oils — Excise duty on mineral oils)
Date: 2003-11-15
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: European Commission, Italy, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, excise duty, mineral oil, tax harmonisation

C 275/16

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

15.11.2003

2.

3.

4.

Such proof must make it possible to establish, without the
slightest ambiguity,
the compensating products have
resulted from processing of the temporary export goods.

that

It is for the national court to determine, in the light of all the
circumstances of the main proceedings, whether or not the
economic operator has adduced that proof.

If so, the amount of the import duty which would be applicable
to the temporary export goods on the basis of their correct tariff
heading may be deducted when the compensating products are
released for free circulation.

(1) OJ C 369 of 22.12.2001.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(First Chamber)

of 25 September 2003

in Case C-437/01: Commission of the European Communi-
ties v Italian Republic (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil
its obligations —
Directives 92/12/EEC and 92/81/EEC — Tax on lubricating
oils — Excise duty on mineral oils)

(2003/C 275/26)

(Language of the case: Italian)

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
in the European Court Reports)

In Case C-437/01, Commission of the European Communities
(Agents: E. Traversa and K. Gross) v Italian Republic (Agent:
I. M. Braguglia, assisted by G. Aiello): Application for a
declaration that, by retaining in force a tax on lubricating oils,
the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under
Article 3(2) of Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February
1992 on the general arrangements for products subject to
excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of
such products (OJ 1992 L 76, p. 1), and Article 8(1)(a) of
Council Directive 92/81/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the
harmonisation of the structures of excise duties on mineral
oils (OJ 1992 L 316, p. 12), as amended by Council Directive
94/74/EEC of 22 December 1994 (OJ 1994 L 365, p. 46), the
Court (First Chamber), composed of: M. Wathelet (Rapporteur),
Judges;
President of the Chamber, P.
S. Alber, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a
judgment on 25 September 2003, in which it:

Jann and A. Rosas,

1. Declares that, by retaining in force a tax on lubricating oils
under the first paragraph of Article 62 of Legislative Decree
No 504 of 26 October 1995, ‘Testo unico delle disposizioni
legislative concernenti le imposte sulla produzione e sui consumi
e relative sanzioni penali e amministrative’ (Consolidated Text
of Legislative Provisions relating to duties on production and
consumption and related criminal and administrative penalties)
beyond the expiry of the period laid down in the reasoned
opinion, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations
under Article 3(2) of Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 Feb-
ruary 1992 on the general arrangements for products subject
to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring
of such products, and Article 8(1)(a) of Council Directive 92/
81/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the harmonisation of the
structures of excise duties on mineral oils, as amended by
Council Directive 94/74/EC of 22 December 1994;

2. Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 31 of 2.2.2002.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 23 September 2003

in Case C-452/01 (Reference for a preliminary ruling
from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof): Margarethe Ospelt and
Schlössle Weissenberg Familienstiftung (1)

(Free movement of capital — Article 73b of the EC Treaty
(now Article 56 EC) — Article 40 of and Annex XII to the
EEA Agreement — Prior authorisation procedure for the
acquisition of agricultural and forestry plots — Admissi-
bility — Conditions)

(2003/C 275/27)

(Language of the case: German)

(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
in the European Court Reports)

In Case C-452/01: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Verwaltungsgerichtshof (Austria) for a preliminary
ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
Margarethe Ospelt and Schlössle Weissenberg Familienstiftung,
on the interpretation of Article 6 of the EC Treaty (now, after
amendment, Article 12 EC) and Articles 73b to 73d, 73f
and 73g of the EC Treaty (now Articles 56 EC to 60 EC), the
Court, composed of: G.C. Rodríguez Iglesias, President,
J.-P. Puissochet (Rapporteur), M. Wathelet, R. Schintgen and
C.W.A. Timmermans (Presidents of Chambers), C. Gulmann,
D.A.O. Edward, A. La Pergola, P. Jann, V. Skouris, F. Macken,
N. Colneric, S. von Bahr, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues and A. Rosas,
Judges; L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate General; H.A. Rühl, Principal
Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on
23 September 2003, in which it has ruled: