CELEX: C1997/252/02
Language: en
Date: 1997-08-16 00:00:00
Title: JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Fifth Chamber) of 5 June 1997 in Case C-2/95 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Østre Landsret): Sparekassernes Datacenter (SDC) v. Skatteministeriet (Sixth VAT Directive - Article 13 B (d), points 3 to 5 - Exempt transactions)

16 . 8 . 97         Ien |                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                   No C 252/1
                                                                      I
                                                               (Information)
                                                 COURT OF JUSTICE
                                                            COURT OF JUSTICE
                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                        accompanied by bona fide certificates of analysis
                         ( Second Chamber)                                    issued by research institutes duly authorized in the
                                                                              Member State of origin, provided that those controls
                            of 5 June 1997                                    are applied in a non-discriminatory manner, that they
in Case C-105/94 (reference for a preliminary ruling from                     observe the principle of proportionality and that
the Tribunale Civile e Penale di Ravenna ): Ditta Angelo                      account is taken, in particular, of the controls already
   Celestini v. Saar-Sektkellerei Faber GmbH &C Co. KG (M                     carried out in the Member State of origin.
 (Common organization of the market in wine — Control
of wines from another Member State — Method of testing                   2 . It is for the national court to determine, in accordance
oxygen isotopes in water using abundance ratio mass                           with the rules of procedure applicable in that Member
                             spectrometry)                                    State, whether the wine analysis method known as
                                                                              'determination of 0 18/0 16 abundance ratio of water in
                              97/C 252/01                                     wine ' is consistent with the criteria of accuracy,
                                                                              repeatability and reproducibility laid down in
                  (Language of the case: Italian)                             Article 74 (2) (c) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 822/
                                                                              87 of 16 March 1987 on the common organization of
                                                                              the market in wine.
   (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
            published in the European Court Reports)
                                                                         (') OJ No C 132, 14 . 5 . 1994 .
In Case C-105/94 : reference to the Court under Article 177
of the EC Treaty from the Tribunale Civile e Penale di
Ravenna ( Civil and Criminal Court, Ravenna ) ( Italy ), for
a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before
that court between Ditta Angelo Celestini and Saar­
Sektkellerei     Faber     GmbH      &   Co .  KG    —    on   the                      JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
interpretation of Articles 30 and 36 of the EC Treaty and                                         (Fifth Chamber)
of Article 74 ( 2 ) (c ) of Council Regulation ( EEC ) No 822/
                                                                                                   of 5 June 1997
87 of 16 March 1987 on the common organization of the
market in wine ( OJ No L 84, 27. 3 . 1987, p. 1 ), read in              in Case C-2/95 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
conjunction with Commission Regulation ( EEC) No 2676/                  the Østre Landsret): Sparekassernes Datacenter ( SDC ) v.
90 of 17 September 1990 determining Community                                                  Skatteministeriet ( ] )
methods for the analysis of wines ( OJ No L 272, 3 . 10 .
1990, p. 1 ) — the Court ( Second Chamber ), composed of:
                                                                        (Sixth VAT Directive — Article 13 B (d), points 3 to 5 —
                                                                                              Exempt transactions)
G. F. Mancini, President of the Chamber, G. Hirsch
( Rapporteur) and H. Ragnemalm, Judges; N. Fennelly,                                               ( 97/C 252/02 )
Advocate-General; L. Hewlett, Administrator, for the
Registrar, has given a judgment on 5 June 1997, in which                                 (Language of the case: Danish)
it has ruled :
1 . Articles 30 and 36 of the EC Treaty must be                            (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
      interpreted as not precluding a Member State from                            published in the European Court Reports)
      subjecting wine produced in another Member State to
      an appropriate control in order to test its conformity            In Case C-2/95 : reference to the Court under Article 177
      with Community rules, even where that wine is                     of the EC Treaty from the 0stre Landsret ( Denmark) for a
 ---pagebreak--- No C 252/2            EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                      16 . 8 . 97
preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that                character and specific to, and essential for, those
court between Sparekassernes Datacenter ( SDC ) and                      services .
Skatteministeriet — on the interpretation of points 3 , 4
and 5 of Article 13 B ( d) of the Sixth Council Directive
( 77/388/EEC ) of 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of               6 . The mere fact that a service is invoiced by a third
the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes                 party does not prevent the transaction to which it
— Common system of value added tax: uniform basis                        relates from being exempt under points 3 and 5 of
of assessment ( OJ No L 145 , 13 . 6 . 1977, p. 1 ) — the                Article 13 B (d) of the Sixth Directive.
Court ( Fifth Chamber), composed of: J. C. Moitinho
de Almeida, President of the Chamber, L. Sevón
( Rapporteur), D. A. O. Edward, P. Jann and M. Wathelet,            n OJ No C 74, 25 . 3 . 1995 .
Judges; D. Ruiz-Jarabo Colomer, Advocate-General; H.
von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, for the Registrar, has
given a judgment on 5 June 1997, in which it has ruled:
1 . Points 3 and 5 of Article 13 B (d) of the Sixth Council                         JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
     Directive (77/388/EEC) of 17 May 1977, on the
     harmonization of the laws of the Member States                                         ( Sixth Chamber)
     relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value                                      of 5 June 1997
     added tax: uniform basis of assessment, are to be
     interpreted as meaning that the exemption is not               in Case C-398/95 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
     subject to the condition that the transactions be              the Symvoulio Epikrateias ): Syndesmos ton en Elladi
     effected by a certain type of institution, by a certain        Touristikon kai Taxidiotikon Grafeion v. Ypourgos
     type of legal person or wholly or partly by certain                                         Ergasias ( ! )
     electronic means or manually.
                                                                                      (Freedom to provide services)
                                                                                               ( 97/C 252/03 )
2 . The exemption provided for points 3 and 5 of
     Article 13 B (d) of the Sixth Directive is not subject to
     the condition that the service be provided by an                                (Language of the case: Greek)
     institution which has a legal relationship with the end
     customer. The fact that a transaction covered by those
  , provisions is effected by a third party but appears to             (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
     the end customer to be a service provided by the bank                     published in the European Court Reports)
     does not preclude exemption for the transaction.
                                                                    In Case C-398/95 : reference to the Court under Article 177
 3 . Point 3 of Article 13 B (d) of the Sixth Directive is to       of the EC Treaty from the Symvoulio Epikrateias ( Council
     be interpreted as meaning that transactions concerning         of State ) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings
     transfers and payments and transactions in shares,             pending before that court between Syndesmos ton en
     interests in companies or associations, debentures and         Elladi Touristikon kai Taxidiotikon Grafeion and Yporgos
     other securities include transactions carried out by a         Ergasias, supported by 1 . Somateio Diplomatouchon
     data-handling centre if those transactions are distinct        Xenagon, 2 . Panellinia Omospondia Xenagon — on the
     in character and are specific to, and essential for, the       interpretation of Articles 59 and 60 of the EC Treaty —
     exempt transactions.                                           the Court ( Sixth Chamber ), composed of: G. F. Mancini,
                                                                    President of the Chamber, J. L. Murray, P. J. G. Kapteyn
                                                                     ( Rapporteur), FI. Ragnemalm and R. Schintgen, Judges;
                                                                     C. O. Lenz, Advocate-General; D. Louterman-Hubeau,
 4 . Services consisting in making financial information             Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a
     available to banks and other users are not covered by           judgment on 5 June 1997, in which it has ruled:
     points 3 and 5 of Article 13 B (d) of the Sixth
     Directive .
                                                                     1 . The rules of a Member State which, by prescribing a
                                                                          mandatory legal form of employment relationship
                                                                          between the parties, prevent tourist and travel
 5 . The mere fact that transactions concerning the                       agencies, wherever they are established, from
     management of deposits, purchase contracts and loans                 concluding, in connection with the operation of tourist
     are carried out by a data-handling centre does not                   programmes organized by them in that Member State,
     prevent them from constituting services covered by                   a contract for the provision of services with a tourist
     points 13 and 15 of Annex F to the Sixth Directive. It               guide from another Member State who is licensed to
      is for the national court to determine whether, before              pursue his profession in the first State constitute a
      1 January 1991 , those transactions were separate in                barrier for the purposes of Article 59 of the EC Treaty.