CELEX: C2005/093/16
Language: en
Date: 2005-04-16 00:00:00
Title: Case C-41/05: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de première instance de Liège (Belgium) by judgment of that court of 24 January 2005 in Air Liquide Industries Belgium SA v Province de Liège

16.4.2005   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 93/9
            
         Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de première instance de Liège (Belgium) by judgment of that court of 24 January 2005 in Air Liquide Industries Belgium SA v Province de Liège
   (Case C-41/05)
   (2005/C 93/16)
   Language of the case: French
   Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by judgment of the Tribunal de première instance de Liège (Belgium) of 24 January 2005, received at the Court Registry on 3 February 2005, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings between Air Liquide Industries Belgium SA and Province de Liège on the following questions:
   
               1.
            
            
               Must exemption from a provincial tax on motive force granted solely in respect of motors used in natural gas installations, to the exclusion of motors used for other industrial gases, be regarded as State aid within the meaning of Article 87 of the consolidated version of the Treaty establishing the European Community?
            
         
               2.
            
            
               If the answer to the preceding question is ‘yes’, must the national court, before which an action is brought by a taxpayer who has not enjoyed exemption from the provincial tax on motive force, order the public authority which levied that tax to repay it to that taxpayer if it finds that, in law and in fact, it is not possible for the public authority which levied that tax to claim it from the taxpayer who enjoyed exemption from the tax on motive force?
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Must a tax on motive force levied on motors used for transporting industrial gas by means of pipes under very high pressure, which requires the use of compression installations, be regarded as a charge having equivalent effect prohibited by Articles 25 et seq. of the consolidated version of the Treaty, if it is apparent that, de facto, it is levied by a province or a municipality on the transport of industrial gas outside its territorial limits, when in the same conditions the transport of natural gas is exempt from such a tax?
            
         
               4.
            
            
               Must a tax on motive force levied on motors used for transporting industrial gas by means of pipes under very high pressure, which requires the use of compression installations, be regarded as an internal taxation measure, prohibited by Articles 90 et seq. of the Treaty, if it is apparent that the transport of natural gas is exempt from that tax?
            
         
               5.
            
            
               If the answer to the questions above is ‘yes’, is a taxpayer who has paid the tax on motive force justified in seeking the reimbursement of that tax from 16 July 1992, the date on which the Legros and Others judgment was given?