Fonden Marselisborg Lystbådehavn v Skatteministeriet and Skatteministeriet v Fonden Marselisborg Lystbådehavn.
Date: 2005-03-03
27. According to settled case-law, the exemptions provided for in Article 13 of the Sixth Directive have their own independent meaning in Community law which must therefore be given a Community definition (see Case C-358/97 Commission v Ireland  [2000] ECR I-6301, paragraph 51; Case C-315/00 Maierhofer  [2003] ECR I-563, paragraph 25; Case C-275/01 Sinclair Collis  [2003] ECR I-5965, paragraph 22; and Case C-284/03 Temco Europe  [2004] ECR I-0000, paragraph 16) .
28. In the absence of a definition of ‘letting of immovable property’ in Article 13B(b) of the Sixth Directive, that provision must therefore be interpreted in the light of the context in which it is used and the scheme of the Directive, having particular regard to the underlying purpose of the exemption which it establishes (see, to that effect, Temco Europe , paragraph 18).
29. In that connection, given that the exemptions referred to in Article 13 of the Sixth Directive are exceptions to the general principle that VAT is to be levied on all services supplied for consideration by a taxable person, they should be interpreted strictly (see, in particular, Commission v Ireland , paragraph 52; Case C-359/97 Commission  v United Kingdom  [2000] ECR I-6355, paragraph 64, and Sinclair Collis , paragraph 23).
30. In numerous judgments the Court has defined the letting of immovable property, within the meaning of Article 13B(b) of the Sixth Directive, as the landlord assigning to the tenant, in return for rent and for an agreed period, the right to occupy his property and to exclude other persons from it (see, to that effect, Commission v Ireland,  paragraphs 52 and 57; Case C-409/98 Mirror Group  [2001] ECR I-7175, paragraph 31; Case C-326/99 ‘ Goed Wonen ’ [2001] ECR I‑6831, paragraph 55, and Temco Europe , paragraph 19).
34. In the case of water-based mooring berths, the order for reference indicates that FML is the owner of the port land and the port basin. The fact that that land is partly under water does not prevent it from being categorised as immovable property that can be leased or let. As the owner FML may rent out all the port land, including specified parts of it. The letting does not, however, concern a particular quantity of water, but a specific part of the port basin. That water-covered area is clearly delimited and cannot be moved.
42. In that connection it must be recalled that, according to settled case-law, where there is a difference between the language versions the provision in question must be interpreted by reference to the purpose and general scheme of the rules of which it forms a part (see, in particular, Case C‑372/88 Cricket St Thomas  [1990] ECR I-1345, paragraph 19, and Case C-384/98 D  [2000] ECR I-6795, paragraph 16).
43. As regards the letting of premises and sites for parking vehicles, Article 13B(b)(2) of the Sixth Directive introduces an exception to the exemption laid down for the leasing and letting of immovable property. It thus makes the transactions to which it refers subject to the general rule laid down in that directive, namely that VAT is to be charged on all taxable transactions, except in the case of derogations expressly provided for. That provision cannot therefore be interpreted strictly (see Case C‑346/95 Blasi  [1998] ECR I-481, paragraph 19).
44. Therefore, the term ‘vehicles’ used in that provision must be interpreted as covering all means of transport, including boats.