Case C-5/14: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 4 June 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg — Germany) — Kernkraftwerke Lippe-Ems GmbH v Hauptzollamt Osnabrück (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Article 267 TFEU — Interlocutory procedure for review of constitutionality — Examination of whether a national law complies with both EU law and with the Constitution of the Member State concerned — Discretion enjoyed by a national court to refer questions to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling — National legislation levying a duty on the use of nuclear fuel — Directives 2003/96/EC and 2008/118/EC — Article 107 TFEU — Articles 93 EA, 191 EA and 192 EA)
Date: 2015-06-04
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU law - national law, constitution, constitutional law, judicial review, nuclear fuel, tax








C_2015236EN.01001301.xml










20.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 236/13





Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 4 June 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg — Germany) — Kernkraftwerke Lippe-Ems GmbH v Hauptzollamt Osnabrück
(Case C-5/14) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 267 TFEU - Interlocutory procedure for review of constitutionality - Examination of whether a national law complies with both EU law and with the Constitution of the Member State concerned - Discretion enjoyed by a national court to refer questions to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling - National legislation levying a duty on the use of nuclear fuel - Directives 2003/96/EC and 2008/118/EC - Article 107 TFEU - Articles 93 EA, 191 EA and 192 EA))
(2015/C 236/17)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Hamburg

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Kernkraftwerke Lippe-Ems GmbH

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Osnabrück

Operative part of the judgment







1)


Article 267 TFEU must be interpreted as meaning that a national court which has doubts as to whether national legislation is compatible with both EU law and with the Constitution of the Member State concerned neither loses the right nor, as the case may be, is exempt from the obligation to submit questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning the interpretation or validity of that law, on the ground that an interlocutory procedure for review of the constitutionality of that legislation is pending before the national court responsible for carrying out such review.










2)


Article 14(1)(a) of Council Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity and Article 1(1) and (2) of Council Directive 2008/118/EC of 16 December 2008 concerning the general arrangements for excise duty and repealing Directive 92/12/EEC are to be interpreted as not precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which levies a duty on the use of nuclear fuel for the commercial production of electricity.










3)


Article 107 TFEU must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which levies a duty on the use of nuclear fuel for the commercial production of electricity.










4)


The first paragraph of Article 93 EA, Article 191 EA, in conjunction with the first paragraph of Article 3 of the Protocol (No 7) on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Union annexed to the EU, FEU and EAEC Treaties, and the second paragraph of Article 192 EA, in conjunction with the second paragraph of Article 1 EA and Article 2(d) EA, are to be interpreted as not precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which imposes a duty on the use of nuclear fuel for the commercial production of electricity.






(1)  OJ C 85, 22.3.2014.