Case C-233/05: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof te 's-Hertogenbosch by judgment of that court of 16 February 2005 in V.O.F. Dressuurstal Jespers v Inspecteur van de Belastingsdienst/Zuidwest/kantoor Breda van de Rijksbelastingdienst
Date: 2005-08-20
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: VAT, equidae, interpretation of the law, provision of services, tax relief

C 205/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.8.2005

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed periods,
the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to
comply with Directive 1999/45/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 31 May 1999 concerning the approxima-
tion of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the
Member States relating to the classification, packaging and label-
ling of dangerous preparations, and Commission Directive
2001/60/EC of 7 August 2001 adapting to technical progress
Directive 1999/45, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed
to fulfil its obligations under those directives.

2. Orders the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.

(1) OJ C 82 of 02.04.2005.

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof
te 's-Hertogenbosch by judgment of that court of 16
February 2005 in V.O.F. Dressuurstal Jespers v Inspecteur
van de Belastingsdienst/Zuidwest/kantoor Breda van de
Rijksbelastingdienst

capable of participating in (dressage) competitions at a
higher level than before such training, is there production
as referred to in Question 1(a) above?

2.

Is it material to the reply to these questions whether there
is a change to the horse which can be measured objec-
tively, such as, for example, it being or becoming entitled
to compete in a higher dressage class?

3. Does it make any difference in this regard whether the
horse concerned also actually attains the intended objec-
tive (the supply by the producer) or that the horse does
not attain the objective sought by its training on account
of problems relating to health or ability, for example?

4. What are the consequences of the answer to Questions 2
and 3 having regard to the fact that this case concerns a
recurrent charge where the tax owed is paid periodically
by declaration?

(1) Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmo-
nisation of
the Member State relating to turnover
taxes— Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assess-
ment (OJ 1977 L 145 of 13 June 1977, p. 1).

the laws of

(Case C-233/05)

(2005/C 205/11)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van
Beroep te Brussel by judgment of that court of 25 May
2005 in 1. The Belgian State, represented by the Minister
for Social Affairs, 2. The Belgian State, represented by the
State Secretary for Public Health v BVBA De Backer

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by judgment of the Gerechtshof te 's-Herto-
genbosch ('s-Hertogenbosch Regional Court of Appeal) of 16
February 2005, received at the Court Registry on 30 May
2005, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings between
V.O.F. Dressuurstal Jespers and Inspecteur van de Belastings-
dienst/Zuidwest/kantoor Breda van de Rijksbelastingdienst on
the following questions:

1(a)

In the case in which a horse that has not been broken in
is trained to make it suitable for certain uses, such as, for
example, use as a riding horse, is a new article created
and is there therefore production within the terms of
Article 5(7)(a) of the Sixth Directive? (1)

1(b) In the case in which,

for example, a horse which is
already suitable for certain uses such as referred to in
Question 1(a) above is trained in such a way that it is

(Case C-234/05)

(2005/C 205/12)

(Language of the case: Dutch)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the Euro-
pean Communities by judgment of the Hof van Beroep te
Brussel (Brussels Court of Appeal) (Belgium) of 25 May 2005,
received at the Court Registry on 27 May 2005, for a preli-
minary ruling in the proceedings between 1. The Belgian State,
represented by the Minister for Social Affairs 2. The Belgian
State, represented by the State Secretary for Public Health, and
B.V.B.A. De Backer on the following question: