Elektrownia Pątnów II sp. zoo v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Poznaniu.
Date: 2009-11-12
30. In order to give an answer to that question, account must be taken, when considering the interpretation and application of Directive 69/335, of the particular situation of a State, such as the Republic of Poland, which became a member of the European Union with effect from 1 May 2004 (see, to that effect, Case C‑366/05 Optimus – Telecomunicações [2007] ECR I‑4985, paragraph 25).
31. It follows from that fact that Directive 69/335 was not applicable in that State before that date. Any measures relating to the taxation or exemption from taxation of transactions falling within the definition of the raising of capital were adopted within the Polish legal system, before the date referred to above, solely on the basis of national law (see, to that effect, Optimus – Telecomunicações , paragraph 26).
32. It follows, furthermore, from settled case-law that new rules apply immediately to the future effects of a situation which arose under the old rules (see, inter alia, Case 270/84 Licata  v ESC  [1986] ECR 2305, paragraph 31). In application of that principle the Court has thus held that, if the Act concerning the conditions of accession of a Member State contains no specific conditions with regard to the application of a provision of the EC Treaty, that provision must be regarded as being immediately applicable and binding on that Member State from the date of its accession, with the result that it applies to the future effects of situations arising prior to that new Member State’s accession to the Communities (see, to that effect, Case C‑122/96 Saldanha and MTS [1997] ECR I‑5325, paragraph 14, and Case C‑162/00 Pokrzeptowicz‑Meyer [2002] ECR I‑1049, paragraph 50).
33. It also follows from settled case‑law that, in order to ensure observance of the principles of legal certainty and the protection of legitimate expectations, the substantive rules of Community law must be interpreted as applying to situations existing before their entry into force only in so far as it follows clearly from their terms, objectives or general scheme that such effect must be given to them (see, inter alia, Case 21/81 Bout [1982] ECR 381, paragraph 13; Case C‑34/92 GruSa Fleisch [1993] ECR I‑4147, paragraph 22; and Pokrzeptowicz-Meyer , paragraph 49).
34. As the Act concerning the conditions of accession of the Republic of Poland to the European Union contains no specific conditions with regard to the application in time of Directive 69/335, it is appropriate therefore, in order to provide an answer to the question referred, to determine whether a situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings constitutes a situation which arose prior to the entry into force of Directive 69/335 in Poland and to which that directive could therefore apply retroactively only if it was clearly intended to have that effect, or whether it constitutes a situation which arose prior to the entry into force of that directive in Poland, but the future effects of which are governed by that directive from the date of its entry into force, in accordance with the principle that new rules apply immediately to current situations (see, to that effect, Pokrzeptowicz‑Meyer , paragraph 51).
40. Contrary to the Republic of Poland’s contentions, such an interpretation of Directive 69/335 in no way amounts to a retroactive application of that directive to facts occurring prior to that Member State’s accession, but simply amounts to applying, from the date of its entry into force, the prohibition of double taxation contained therein, which necessarily leads to account also being taken of taxation which had already occurred prior to that entry into force.