CELEX: E2007J0006
Language: en
Date: 2008-09-18
Title: Judgment of the Court of 5 March 2008 in Case E-6/07 — HOB vín ehf. and Faxaflóahafnir sf. (Port charges — Charges having equivalent effect to customs duties — Internal taxation — Free movement of goods)

18.9.2008   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 239/20
            
         
      JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
   
   of 5 March 2008
   in Case E-6/07
   HOB vín ehf. and Faxaflóahafnir sf.
   
      (Port charges — Charges having equivalent effect to customs duties — Internal taxation — Free movement of goods)
   
   (2008/C 239/09)
   In Case E-6/07 between HOB vín ehf. and Faxaflóahafnir sf. — Request to the Court by Hæstiréttur Íslands (the Supreme Court of Iceland), concerning rules on free movement of goods within the EEA, the Court, composed of Henrik Bull, Judge-Rapporteur, Carl Baudenbacher, President and Thorgeir Örlygsson, Judge, gave judgment on 5 March 2008, the operative part of which is as follows:
   
               1.
            
            
               the levying of charges for port services provided by a partnership owned by several municipalities falls to be assessed under Article 14 EEA if there is no alternative port to those of the partnership within the area normally served by those ports;
            
         
               2.
            
            
               a port charge such as the one at issue does not constitute discrimination contrary to Article 14 EEA of imported alcoholic beverages in relation to domestic alcoholic beverages as long as the reason why only imported alcoholic beverages become subject to the charge is the fact that domestic alcoholic beverages are not transported by sea and so do not need port services, and the body setting the tariff for the port services does not set the tariff for comparable services needed in relation to domestic alcoholic beverages.
               In order for such a charge to violate Article 14 EEA by discriminating imported alcoholic beverages in relation to domestic non-alcoholic beverages, the charge must have the effect, on the market in question, of reducing potential consumption of the imported products to the advantage of competing domestic products.