CELEX: 62014CA0546
Language: en
Date: 2016-04-07 00:00:00
Title: Case C-546/14: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 7 April 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Udine — Italy) — proceedings by Degano Trasporti Sas di Ferruccio Degano & C., in liquidation (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Taxation — VAT — Article 4(3) TEU — Directive 2006/112/EC — Insolvency — Procedure for an arrangement with creditors — Partial payment of VAT debts)

13.6.2016   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 211/15
            
         
      Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 7 April 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Udine — Italy) — proceedings by Degano Trasporti Sas di Ferruccio Degano & C., in liquidation
      (Case C-546/14) (1)
      
      ((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - VAT - Article 4(3) TEU - Directive 2006/112/EC - Insolvency - Procedure for an arrangement with creditors - Partial payment of VAT debts))
      (2016/C 211/17)
      Language of the case: Italian
      
         Referring court
      
      Tribunale di Udine
      
         Party to the main proceedings
      
      Degano Trasporti Sas di Ferruccio Degano & C., in liquidation
      
         Intervening party: Pubblico Ministero presso il Tribunale di Udine
      
         Operative part of the judgment
      
      Article 4(3) TEU and Articles 2, 250(1) and 273 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax do not preclude national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, interpreted as meaning that an insolvent trader may apply to a court to open a procedure for an arrangement with creditors for the purpose of settling its debts by liquidating its assets, in which that trader offers only partial payment of a value added tax debt and establishes by an independent expert’s report that that debt would not be repaid more fully in the event of that trader’s bankruptcy.
      
         (1)  OJ C 81, 9.3.2015.