Case C-435/04: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Cour de cassation de Belgique by decision of that court of 6 October 2004 in the case of Sébastien Victor Leroy against Ministère public
Date: 2004-12-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU Member State, hire purchase, interpretation of the law, vehicle registration, vehicle rental

4.12.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 300/35

The legislation also constitutes a genuine obstacle for unregis-
tered parties who wish to offer their services in Belgium. They
must accept receiving the amount billed less 15 %, even if they
have no tax debt to which the amount withheld could be
applied, and they can recover that sum only after a certain
time, by applying for its restitution.

Those measures cannot be regarded as objectively justified. First
of all, in the majority of cases a person providing services who
is established in another Member State is not liable for the
taxes to which the legislation relates. Also, in specific situations
where tax debts would be payable or recoverable in Belgium,
the mechanism set up by the provisions must, because of its
general nature, be considered disproportionate.

Finally, the possibility of registration does not justify the obliga-
tion to withhold and the joint and several liability. The action
involved in the registration procedure, which goes far beyond
merely communicating information to the Belgian authorities,
means that registration is not a valid alternative for undertak-
ings not established in Belgium which wish to exercise their
freedom to offer their services in Belgium occasionally. The
requirement to register renders the Treaty provisions intended
to guarantee the freedom to provide services entirely redun-
dant.

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Korkein oikeus
by order of that court of 6 October 2004 in the case of
Jan-Erik Anders Ahokainen and Mati Leppik against Viral-
linen syttäjä

(Case C-434/04)

(2004/C 300/66)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by order of the Korkein oikeus (Supreme
Court) (Finland)) of 6 October 2004, which was received at the
Court Registry on 11 October 2004, for a preliminary ruling in
the case of Jan-Erik Anders Ahokainen and Mati Leppik against
Virallinen syttäjä (Public Prosecutor).

The Korkein oikeus asks the Court of Justice to give a preli-
minary ruling on the following questions:

2. If the above question is answered in the affirmative, is the
licence system to be regarded as permitted under Article 30
EC?

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Cour de cassa-
tion de Belgique by decision of that court of 6 October
2004 in the case of Sébastien Victor Leroy against
Ministère public

(Case C-435/04)

(2004/C 300/67)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by order of
the Cour de cassation de
Belgique (Belgium Court of Cassation) of 6 October 2004
received at the Court Registry on 14 October 2004, for a preli-
minary ruling in the case of Sébastien Victor Leroy against
Ministère public on the following question:

Do Articles 49 to 55 of the Treaty of 25 March 1957 estab-
lishing the European Community preclude a national law of a
Member State which prohibits a person who resides and works
in that State from using in that State a vehicle which belongs
to a leasing company established in another Member State
when that vehicle has not been registered in the former State,
even if it has been in the latter?

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Hof van Cassatie
van Belgie by decision of that court of 5 October 2004 in
the case of Léopold Henri Van Esbroeck against Openbaar
Ministerie

(Case C-436/01)

(2004/C 300/68)

1. Is Article 28 EC to be interpreted as precluding legislation
of a Member State under which non-denatured ethyl alcohol
of over 80 % (spirits) may be imported only by a person
who has obtained a licence to do so?

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by order of the Hof van Cassatie van Belgie
(Court of Cassation (Belgium)) of 5 October 2004, received at
the Court Registry on 13 October 2004, for a preliminary
ruling in the case of Léopold Henri Van Esbroeck against Open-
baar Ministerie on the following questions: