CELEX: C2003/146/06
Language: en
Date: 2003-06-21 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 8 May 2003 in Case C-269/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof): Wolfgang Seeling v Finanzamt Starnberg, (Sixth VAT Directive — Articles 6(2)(a) and 13B(b) — Private use by the taxable person of a dwelling in a building forming, in its entirety, part of the assets of the business — Such use not equivalent to the leasing or letting of immovable property)

C 146/4                   EN                          Official Journal of the European Union                                               21.6.2003
                   JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                                       JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                           (Sixth Chamber)                                                               (Fifth Chamber)
                            of 3 April 2003                                                               of 8 May 2003
in Case C-144/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from                     in Case C-269/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling from
        the Bundesgerichtshof): Matthias Hoffmann ( 1)                        the Bundesfinanzhof): Wolfgang Seeling v Finanzamt
                                                                                                           Starnberg, (1)
(VAT — Sixth Directive — Exemptions for certain activities
in the public interest — Body — Meaning — Services                            (Sixth VAT Directive — Articles 6(2)(a) and 13B(b) —
performed by a natural person — Cultural services by a                        Private use by the taxable person of a dwelling in a building
                                soloist)                                      forming, in its entirety, part of the assets of the business —
                                                                              Such use not equivalent to the leasing or letting of immovable
                                                                                                             property)
                            (2003/C 146/05)
                                                                                                         (2003/C 146/06)
                     (Language of the case: German)
                                                                                                  (Language of the case: German)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                     in the European Court Reports)
                                                                              (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                                                                                                  in the European Court Reports)
In Case C-144/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234
EC by the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) for a preliminary
ruling in the criminal proceedings before that court against                  In Case C-269/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234
Matthias Hoffmann, on the interpretation of Article 13A(1)(n)                 EC by the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany) for a preliminary
of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977                      ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between
on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating                Wolfgang Seeling and Finanzamt Starnberg, on the interpret-
to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax:                         ation of Articles 6(2)(a), 13B(b) and 17(2)(a) of Sixth Council
uniform basis of assessment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1), the Court                  Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation
(Sixth Chamber), composed of: J.-P. Puissochet (Rapporteur),                  of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes —
President of the Chamber, R. Schintgen, V. Skouris, F. Macken                 Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assess-
and J.N. Cunha Rodrigues, Judges; L.A. Geelhoed, Advocate                     ment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1), the Court (Fifth Chamber),
General; H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar,               composed of: M. Wathelet, President of the Chamber,
has given a judgment on 3 April 2003, in which it has ruled:                  C. W. A. Timmermans, D. A. O. Edward, P. Jann and S. von
                                                                              Bahr (Rapporteur), Judges; F. G. Jacobs, Advocate General;
                                                                              H. A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has
1.    Article 13A(1)(n) of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC             given a judgment on 8 May 2003, in which it has ruled:
      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, is to be               Articles 6(2)(a) and 13B(b) of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/
      interpreted to the effect that the expression ‘other [recognised]       EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the
      cultural bodies’ does not exclude soloists performing individu-         Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of
      ally.                                                                   value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, must be interpreted as
                                                                              precluding national legislation which treats as an exempt supply of
                                                                              services, on the basis that it constitutes a leasing or letting of
2.    The heading of Article 13A of that directive does not, of itself,       immovable property within the meaning of Article 13B(b), the
      entail restrictions on the possibilities of exemption provided for      private use by a taxable person of part of a building which is treated
      by that provision.                                                      as forming, in its entirety, part of the assets of his business.
( 1) OJ C 176 of 24.6.2000.                                                   (1 ) OJ C 259 of 9.9.2000.