Case C-170/06: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale di Napoli lodged on  30 March 2006  — Giuseppina Montoro and Michelangelo Liguori v Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Date: 2006-06-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: international convention, interpretation of the law, jurisdiction

17.6.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 143/25

2. Can ‘special measures’ within the terms of Article 27(1) of
the Sixth Council Directive consist, having regard to their
character and purpose, in the possibility of imposing on a
taxable person for VAT purposes an additional tax liability
fixed by a decision of the tax authority where it is objec-
tively established that the taxable person has declared an
understated amount of tax liability or an overstated amount
of the tax difference to be repaid or an overstated amount
of input tax to be repaid?

(1) OJ 71, 14.4.1967, p. 1301.
(2) OJ L 145, 13.6.1977, p. 1.

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale di
Napoli lodged on 30 March 2006 — Giuseppina Montoro
and Michelangelo Liguori v Beth Israel Deaconess Medical
Center

(Case C-170/06)

(2006/C 143/45)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Napoli

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Giuseppina Montoro and Michelangelo Liguori

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione
Tributaria Regionale di Genova lodged on 3 April 2006 —
Agrover S.r.l. v Agenzia Dogane Circoscrizione Doganale
di Genova

(Case C-173/06)

(2006/C 143/46)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Commissione Tributaria Regionale di Genova

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Agrover S.r.l.

Defendant: Agenzia Dogane Circoscrizione Doganale di Genova

Questions referred

1. Can Article 216 of the Community Customs Code (Regu-
lation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992) apply where
a Community product (rice) previously exported under the
inward processing procedure with an EUR1 certificate to a
non-member country (with which an agreement on prefer-
ential tariff treatment is in force) gives rise to the application
of customs duties at the time of the subsequent compen-
sating reimportation of the same (or equivalent) goods from
a so-called ‘non-agreement’ non-member country?

2. If duties under Article 216 of the Community Customs
Code are not levied at the time of the compensating impor-
tation, may the customs authorities seek to recover them a
posteriori, or does the exemption referred to in Article 220
of the Community Customs Code apply?

Defendant: Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center

Action brought on 4 April 2006 — Commission of the
European Communities v Kingdom of Spain

Question referred

Interpretation of Article 5(3) of the Brussels Convention of
1968 requested in order to establish whether or not, leaving
aside the hypothesis of multiple instances of damage, the test
of the courts for the place where the harmful event occurred
can serve to found jurisdiction also for the courts of the place
where the person injured became aware of the existence of
damage attributable to an act that took place in another State.

(Case C-177/06)

(2006/C 143/47)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, Agent, acting as Agent(s))

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain