CELEX: C1999/033/05
Language: en
Date: 1999-02-06 00:00:00
Title: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Diikitiko Protodikio Thessalonikis (Fifth Chamber, Three Judges) by judgment of that court of 29 October 1998 in the case of Kapniki Mikhailidis A.E. against the Idrima Kinonikon Asfalision (Case C-441/98)

C 33/4                EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                    6.2.1999
down in directives for their transposition. That time-limit             refund to a trader financial charges on the value of
expired on 30 November 1996 without the Italian                         exported goods which must be regarded as levied in
Republic having brought into force the necessary                        breach of Community law, on the basis that it is
provisions in order to comply with the directive referred               established that the person who was required to pay
to in the Commission's application.                                     the charges at issue in fact passed them on to other
                                                                        persons, namely the purchasers of the goods, and it
(1) OJ L 155, 6.7.1995, p. 1.                                           does not follow, nor does the trader claim, that that
(2) OJ L 374, 31.12.1990, p. 1.                                         charge caused an increase in the price of the products
(3) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989, p. 1.                                          and a reduction in the volume of his sales with the
                                                                        result that he suffered subsequent loss?
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Diikitiko
Protodikio Thessalonikis (Fifth Chamber, Three Judges)
by judgment of that court of 29 October 1998 in the case            Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Diikitiko
of Kapniki Mikhailidis A.E. against the Idrima Kinonikon            Protodikio Thessalonikis (Fifth Chamber, Three Judges)
                           Asfalision                               by judgment of that court of 29 October 1998 in the case
                                                                    of Kapniki Mikhailidis A.E. against the Idrima Kinonikon
                       (Case C-441/98)
                                                                                               Asfalision
                        (1999/C 33/05)
                                                                                           (Case C-442/98)
                                                                                            (1999/C 33/06)
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by judgment of the Diikitiko
Protodikio Thessalonikis (Administrative Court of First
Instance, Thessaloniki) (Fifth Chamber, Three Judges) of            Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
29 October 1998, received at the Court Registry on                  European Communities by judgment of the Diikitiko
4 December 1998, for a preliminary ruling in the case of            Protodikio Thessalonikis (Administrative Court of First
Kapniki Mikhailidis A.E. against the Idrima Kinonikon               Instance, Thessaloniki) (Fifth Chamber, Three Judges) of
Asfalision (Social Security Institution) on the following           29 October 1998, received at the Court Registry on
questions:                                                          4 December 1998, for a preliminary ruling in the case of
                                                                    Kapniki Mikhailidis A.E. against the Idrima Kinonikon
                                                                    Asfalision (Social Security Institution) on the following
1. Does a charge which is levied by a Member State on               questions:
    domestic goods exported to another Member State in
    proportion to their value constitute a charge having
    equivalent effect to customs duties on exports, having          1. Does a charge which is levied by a Member State on
    regard to the fact that that charge, which is invariably            domestic goods exported to another Member State in
    imposed on a particular category of domestic goods,                 proportion to their value constitute a charge having
    in accordance with objective criteria and within the                equivalent effect to customs duties on exports, having
    framework of a general system of taxation, is not                   regard to the fact that that charge, which is invariably
    imposed on domestic products which are distributed in               imposed on a particular category of domestic goods,
    the home market or on like goods which are imported                 in accordance with objective criteria and within the
    into the country from another Member State?                         framework of a general system of taxation, is not
    Alternatively is the abovementioned proportional                    imposed on domestic products which are distributed in
    contribution payable by tobacco exporters Ð which is                the home market or on like goods which are imported
    levied and credited as income of the IKA, a social                  into the country from another Member State?
    security institution, for the benefit of the Tobacco                Alternatively is the abovementioned proportional
    Workers' Pensions Branch Ð by reason of its                         contribution payable by tobacco exporters Ð which is
    objective, that is to say boosting the financial                    levied and credited as income of the IKA, a social
    resources of the particular insurance branch, not                   security institution, for the benefit of the Tobacco
    inconsistent with Community law, in that it constitutes             Workers' Pensions Branch Ð by reason of its
    in a broader sense a contribution in favour of an                   objective, that is to say boosting the financial
    insurance body for the purpose of achieving the social              resources of the particular insurance branch, not
    security objectives in respect of the particular group of           inconsistent with Community law, in that it constitutes
    workers, who may be employed in undertakings like                   in a broader sense a contribution in favour of an
    the plaintiff's, and are in any event entitled, even by             insurance body for the purpose of achieving the social
    means of the imposition of charges such as the one in               security objectives in respect of the particular group of
    this case, to social security, in accordance with the               workers, who may be employed in undertakings like
    appropriate provisions of the constitution of the                   the plaintiff's, and are in any event entitled, even by
    particular Member State?                                            means of the imposition of charges such as the one in
                                                                        this case, to social security, in accordance with the
2. If the first part of the first question is answered in the           appropriate provisions of the constitution of the
    affirmative, is a Member State in principle obliged to              particular Member State?