Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 1 April 2004 inCase C-90/02 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof): Finanzamt Gummersbach v Gerhard Bockemühl (‘Reference for a preliminaryruling — Interpretation of Article 18(1) of the Sixth VAT Directive — Conditionsfor exercise of the right to deduct input VAT — Recipient of a service referredto in Article 9(2)(e) of the Sixth VAT Directive — Supply of staff by a taxableperson established abroad — Recipient liable for VAT as the person to whomthe supply was made — Requirement to hold an invoice — Content of the invoice’)
Date: 2004-04-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: interpretation of the law, invoicing, provision of services, tax, tax exemption

30.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 106/7

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 25 March 2004

service referred to in Article 9(2)(e) of the Sixth VAT Direc-
tive — Supply of staff by a taxable person established abroad
— Recipient liable for VAT as the person to whom the
supply was made — Requirement to hold an invoice —
Content of the invoice’)

in Case C-71/02 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
Industrie-
the Oberster Gerichtshof): Herbert Karner

Auktionen GmbH v Troostwijk GmbH (1)

(‘Free movement of goods — Article 28 EC — Measures
having equivalent effect — Advertising restrictions — Refer-
ence to the commercial origin of goods — Goods from an
insolvent company — Directive 84/450/EEC — Fundamental
rights — Freedom of expression — Principle of proportion-
ality’)

(2004/C 106/10)

(Language of the case: German)

(2004/C 106/09)

(Language of the case:German)

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

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

(Austria)

In Case C-71/02: reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
from the Oberster Gerichtshof
for a preliminary
ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
Herbert Karner Industrie-Auktionen GmbH and Troost-
wijk GmbH Ä on the interpretation of Article 28 EC Ä the
Court
(Fifth Chamber), composed of: C.W.A. Timmermans,
acting as President of the Fifth Chamber, A. Rosas (Rapporteur)
and S. von Bahr, Judges; S. Alber, Advocate General; F. Contet,
Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a judgment on
25 March 2004, the operative part of which is as follows:

Article 28 EC does not preclude national legislation which, irre-
spective of the truthfulness of the information, prohibits any
reference to the fact that goods come from an insolvent estate,
where,
in public announcements or notices intended for a
larger circle of persons, notices given of the sale of goods
which originate from, but no longer constitute part of, the
insolvent estate.

(1) OJ C 144, 15.6.2002.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 1 April 2004

in Case C-90/02 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Bundesfinanzhof): Finanzamt Gummersbach v Gerhard
Bockemühl (1)

In Case C-90/02: reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
by the Bundesfinanzhof (Federal Finance Court) (Germany) for
a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that
court between Finanzamt Gummersbach and Gerhard Bock-
emühl – on the interpretation of Articles 18(1) and 22(3) of
the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on
the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to
turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax: uniform
basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1), as amended by
Council Directive 91/680/EEC of 16 December 1991 supple-
menting the common system of value added tax and amending
Directive 77/388 with a view to the abolition of fiscal frontiers
(OJ 1991 L 376, p. 1) and by Council Directive 92/111/EEC of
14 December 1992 amending Directive 77/388 and intro-
ducing simplification measures with regard to value added tax
(OJ 1992 L 384, p. 47) – the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed
of: P. Jann, acting for the President of the Fifth Chamber, A.
Rosas and S. von Bahr (Rapporteur), Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advo-
for the
cate General; M.-F. Contet, Principal Administrator,
Registrar, has given a judgment on 1 April 2004, in which it
ruled:

A taxable person who is liable, as the recipient of services, for
the value added tax relating thereto, in accordance with Article
21(1) of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May
1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States
relating to turnover taxes – Common system of value added
tax: uniform basis of assessment, as amended by Council Direc-
tive 91/680/EEC of 16 December 1991 supplementing the
common system of value added tax and amending Directive
77/388 with a view to the abolition of fiscal frontiers and by
Council Directive 92/111/EEC of 14 December 1992 amending
Directive 77/388 and introducing simplificationmeasures with
regard to value added tax, is not obliged to be in possession of
an invoice drawn up in accordance with Article 22(3) of that
directive in order to be able to exercise his right to deduct.

(‘Reference for a preliminary ruling — Interpretation of
Article 18(1) of the Sixth VAT Directive — Conditions for
exercise of the right to deduct input VAT — Recipient of a

(1) OJ C 169 of 13.7.2002.