Joined Cases C-290/05 and C-333/05: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 5 October 2006 (references for a preliminary ruling from the Bács-Kiskun Megyei Bíróság and the Hajdú-Bihar Megyei Bíróság — Republic of Hungary) — Ákos Nádasdi v Vám- és Pénzügyőrség Észak-Alföldi Regionális Parancsnoksága (C-290/05), Ilona Németh v Vám- és Pénzügyőrség Dél-Alföldi Regionális Parancsnoksága (C-333/05) (Internal taxation — Registration duty on motor vehicles — Used motor vehicles — Importation)
Date: 2006-12-02
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Hungary, import, interpretation of the law, intra-EU trade, motor car, tax system, used goods, vehicle registration, vehicle tax

C 294/16

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

2.12.2006

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Declares that, by failing to take within the prescribed period all
the measures necessary to recover from the beneficiary the aid
referred to in Commission Decision 2002/14/EC of 12 July
2000 on the State aid granted by France to Scott Paper SA/
Kimberly-Clark, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obliga-
tions under the fourth paragraph of Article 249 EC and Articles
2 and 3 of that decision;

2. Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.

Article 20(1) of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agree-
ment of 14 June 1985 between the Governments of the States of the
Benelux Economic Union, the Federal Republic of Germany and the
French Republic on the gradual abolition of checks at their common
borders, signed on 19 June 1990 at Schengen, is to be interpreted as
meaning that the term ‘first entry’ in that provision refers, besides the
very first entry into the territories of the Contracting States to that
agreement, to the first entry into those territories taking place after the
expiry of a period of six months from that very first entry and also to
any other first entry taking place after the expiry of any new period of
six months following an earlier date of first entry.

(1) OJ C 171, 9.07.2005.

(1) OJ C 193, 06.08.2005.

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 3 October
2006 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil
d'État, France ) — Nicolae Bot v Préfet du Val-de-Marne

(Case C-241/05) (1)

(Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement —
Article 20(1) — Conditions of movement of nationals of a
third country not subject to a visa requirement — Maximum
stay for a period of three months during the six months
following the date of first entry into the Schengen Area —
Successive stays — Definition of ‘first entry’)

(2006/C 294/26)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d'État

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Nicolae Bot

Defendant: Préfet du Val-de-Marne

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 5 October 2006
(references for a preliminary ruling from the Bács-Kiskun
Megyei Bíróság and the Hajdú-Bihar Megyei Bíróság —
Republic of Hungary) — Ákos Nádasdi v Vám- és Pénzü-
győrség Észak-Alföldi Regionális Parancsnoksága
(C-
290/05), Ilona Németh v Vám- és Pénzügyőrség Dél-Alföldi
Regionális Parancsnoksága (C-333/05)

(Joined Cases C-290/05 and C-333/05) (1)

(Internal taxation — Registration duty on motor vehicles —
Used motor vehicles — Importation)

(2006/C 294/27)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring courts

Bács-Kiskun Megyei Bíróság and Hajdú-Bihar Megyei Bíróság

Re:

Parties to the main proceedings

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Conseil d'Etat (France) —
Interpretation of Article 20(1) of the Convention implementing
the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985 between the Govern-
ments of
the
Federal Republic of Germany and the French Republic on the
gradual abolition of checks at their common borders (OJ 2000
L 239, p. 19) — Meaning of first entry into the territories of
the Contracting Parties

the Benelux Economic Union,

the States of

Applicants: Ákos Nádasdi
333/05)

(C-290/05) and Ilona Németh (C-

Defendants: Vám- és Pénzügyőrség Észak-Alföldi Regionális
Parancsnoksága (C-290/05) and Vám- és Pénzügyőrség Dél-
Alföldi Regionális Parancsnoksága (C-333/05)

2.12.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 294/17

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Hajdú-Bihar Megyei
Bíróság — Interpretation of the first paragraph of Art. 90 EC
— Registration duty charged on motor vehicles when they are
first placed in circulation in the Member State which is not
charged on used motor vehicles placed in circulation in the
Member State before 1 February 2004 and which is calculated
independently of the value of the motor vehicle

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 28 September
2006 — Commission of the European Communities v
Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

(Case C-353/05) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Directive
2003/54/EC — Failure to transpose within the period
prescribed)

Operative part of the judgment

(2006/C 294/28)

Language of the case: French

1) A tax such as that imposed in Hungary by Law No CX of 2003
on registration duty (a regisztrációs adóról szóló 2003. évi CX.
törvény), which does not apply to private motor vehicles by reason
of
they cross the frontier, does not constitute a
customs duty on imports or a charge having equivalent effect
within the meaning of Articles 23 EC and 25 EC.

the fact

that

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (repre-
sented by: B. Schima and F. Simonetti, Agents)

2) The first paragraph of Article 90 EC has to be interpreted as
precluding a tax such as that imposed by the Law on registration
duty in so far as

Defendant: Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (represented by: S.
Schreiner, Agent)

— it is charged on used vehicles when they are first placed in

circulation in the territory of a Member State, and

Re:

— its amount, which is determined exclusively by the vehicles'
technical characteristics (engine type, engine capacity) and
their environmental classification, is calculated without taking
the depreciation of the vehicles into account, in such a way
that, when applied to used vehicles imported from other
Member States, it exceeds the amount of that duty included in
the residual value of similar used vehicles which have already
been registered in the Member State of importation.

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to
adopt, within the period prescribed, the provisions necessary to
comply with Directive 2003/54/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 26 June 2003 concerning common rules
for the internal market in electricity and repealing Directive
96/92/EC — Statements made with regard to decommissioning
and waste management activities (OJ 2003 L 176, p. 37)

A comparison with used vehicles placed into circulation in the
Member State in question before the introduction of that duty is
not relevant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court (Fourth Chamber):

3) Article 33 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, does not preclude the levy of a tax
such as that imposed by the Law on registration duty for which
turnover is not the basis of assessment and which does not give
rise,
in trade between Member States, to formalities connected
with the crossing of frontiers.

regulations and administrative provisions necessary

1. Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the period prescribed, the
laws,
to
comply with Directive 2003/54/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 26 June 2003 concerning common rules for
repealing Directive
the
96/92/EC, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to fulfil
its obligations under that directive;

internal market

in electricity

and

(1) OJ C 296, 26.11.2005.
OJ C 315, 10.12.2005.

(1) OJ C 281, 12. 11. 2005.

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