Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 29 April 2004 in Case C-152/02 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof): Terra Baubedarf-Handel GmbH v Finanzamt Osterholz-Scharmbeck (Sixth VAT Directive — Article 17(1) and Article 18(1) and (2) — Right to deduct input VAT — Conditions of exercise)
Date: 2004-04-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, basis of tax assessment, delivery, interpretation of the law, invoicing, provision of services, tax relief, taxpayer

30.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 118/21

provided for in Articles 5(8) and 6(5) of 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
Directive 95/7/EC of 10 April 1995, a transfer of a totality of
assets is not deemed to be a supply of goods or services.

(1) OJ C 169, 13.7.2002.

ment which, under the criteria determined by the Member State in
question, may be considered to serve as an invoice.

(1) OJ C 156, 29.6.2002.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 29 April 2004

in Case C-152/02 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the Bundesfinanzhof): Terra Baubedarf-Handel GmbH v
Finanzamt Osterholz-Scharmbeck (1)

(Sixth VAT Directive — Article 17(1) and Article 18(1) and
(2) — Right to deduct input VAT — Conditions of exercise)

(2004/C 118/36)

(Language of the case: German)

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

In Case C-152/02: reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
from the Bundesfinanzhof (Federal Finance Court) (Germany)
for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that
court between Terra Baubedarf-Handel GmbH and Finanzamt
Osterholz-Scharmbeck — on the interpretation of Articles 17
and 18 of 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) — the
Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: P. Jann, acting for the
President of the Fifth Chamber, C.W.A. Timmermans, A. Rosas,
A. La Pergola and S. von Bahr (Rapporteur), Judges; C. Stix-
Hackl, Advocate General; M. Múgica Arzamendi, Principal
Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 29
April 2004, in which it has ruled:

For the deduction referred to in Article 17(2)(a) of 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, the first sub-
paragraph of Article 18(2) of that directive must be interpreted as
meaning that the right to deduct must be exercised in respect of the
tax period in which the two conditions required by that provision are
satisfied, namely that the goods have been delivered or the services
performed and that the taxable person holds the invoice or the docu-

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Full Chamber)

of 27 April 2004

in Case C-159/02 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
the House
v
Lords): Gregory
Felix Fareed Ismail Grovit, Harada Ltd and Changepoint
SA (1)

Turner

Paul

of

brought

a
in
(Brussels Convention — Proceedings
in another
Contracting State — Proceedings brought
Contracting State by the defendant in the existing proceed-
ings — Defendant acting in bad faith in order to frustrate
the existing proceedings — Compatibility with the Brussels
Convention of the grant of an injunction preventing the
defendant from continuing the action in another Member
State)

(2004/C 118/37)

(Language of the case: English)

In Case C-159/02: reference to the Court under the Protocol of
3 June 1971 on the interpretation by the Court of Justice of
the Convention of 27 September 1968 on Jurisdiction and the
Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters by
the House of Lords (United Kingdom) for a preliminary ruling
in the proceedings pending before that court between Gregory
Paul Turner and Felix Fareed Ismail Grovit, Harada Ltd and
Changepoint SA — on the interpretation of the abovemen-
tioned Convention of 27 September 1968 (OJ 1972 L 299, p.
32), as amended by the Convention of 9 October 1978 on the
Accession of the Kingdom of Denmark, Ireland and the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (OJ 1978 L
304, p. 1, and – amended version – p. 77), by the Convention
of 25 October 1982 on the Accession of the Hellenic Republic
(OJ 1982 L 388, p. 1) and by the Convention of 26 May 1989
on the Accession of the Kingdom of Spain and the Portuguese
Republic (OJ 1989 L 285, p. 1) — the Court, composed of: V.
Skouris, President, P. Jann (Rapporteur), C.W.A. Timmermans,
C. Gulmann, J.N. Cunha Rodrigues and A. Rosas, Presidents of
Chambers, A. La Pergola,
J.-P. Puissochet, R. Schintgen,
N. Colneric and S. von Bahr, Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer,
Advocate General; L. Hewlett, Principal Administrator, for the
Registrar, has given a judgment on 27 April 2004, in which it
has ruled: