- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 29 March 2012.#Ministero dell'Economia e delle Finanze and Agenzia delle Entrate v Safilo Spa.#Reference for a preliminary ruling — Corte Suprema di Cassazione — Corporation tax — National legislation providing for a rate of tax on company dividends differing according to the situation of the company seat — Commercial transaction involving companies resident in Italy and companies resident elsewhere — Decision by the authorities to treat as applicable the tax due in the case of the companies resident outside Italy — Meaning of abuse of rights, as defined in Case C‑255/02 Halifax and Others — Whether applicable to unharmonised domestic taxes such as direct taxes.#Article 104(3), first subparagraph, of the Rules of Procedure — Direct taxation — Conclusion of proceedings pending before the court giving judgment at final instance in tax matters — Abuse of rights — Article 4(3) TEU — Freedoms guaranteed by the Treaty — Principle of non‑discrimination — State aid — Obligation to ensure the effective application of European Union law.#Case C 529/10.
ECLI:EU:C:2012:188
62010CO0529
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
Member States — Obligations — Duty to cooperate in good faith — Putting the law of the Union into effect — Principle of the prohibition of abuse of rights — Free movement of capital — Principle of non-discrimination — Rules on State aid — Direct taxation in the Member States (Art. 4(3) TEU; Arts 63 TFEU and 107(1) TFEU) (see paras 23, 25, 26, 28-33 and operative part.)
Re:
Operative part
The law of the Union, in particular: the principle of the prohibition of abuse of rights, Article 4(3) TEU, the freedoms guaranteed by the FEU Treaty, the principle of non‑discrimination, the rules on State aid and the obligation to ensure the effective application of the law of the Union, must be interpreted as not precluding the application, in a case such as that in the main proceedings relating to direct taxation, of a provision of national law providing for proceedings pending before the court giving judgment at final instance in tax matters to be concluded, on payment of a sum equivalent to 5% of the value of the claim, when those proceedings arise from an application made at first instance more than 10 years before the date on which that provision entered into force and when the tax authorities have been unsuccessful at first and second instance.