13.3.2010

Official Journal of the European Union

C 63/6

(Case C-233/08) (<span class="super">1</span>)

(Mutual assistance for the recovery of claims - Directive 76/308/EEC - Jurisdiction to review of the courts of the Member State in which the requested authority is situated - Enforceability of an instrument permitting enforcement - Lawfulness of notification of the instrument to the debtor - Notification in a language not understood by the addressee)

2010/C 63/09

Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Milan Kyrian

Defendant: Celní úřad Tábor

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Nejvšší správní soud (Czech Republic) — Interpretation of the general principles of the right to a fair trial, sound administration and the rule of law, and of Article 12(3) of Council Directive 76/308/EEC of 15 March 1976 on mutual assistance for the recovery of claims relating to certain levies, duties, taxes and other measures (OJ 1976 L 73, p. 18), as amended by Council Directive 79/1071/EEC of 6 December 1979, amending Directive 76/308/EEC on mutual assistance for the recovery of claims resulting from operations forming part of the system of financing of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund, and of agricultural levies and customs duties (OJ 1979 L 331, p. 10), and by Council Directive 2001/44/EC of 15 June 2001 amending Directive 76/308/EEC on mutual assistance for the recovery of claims resulting from operations forming part of the system of financing the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund, and of agricultural levies and customs duties and in respect of value added tax and certain excise duties (OJ 2001 L 175, p. 17) — Competence of the courts in the Member State in which the requested authority has its seat to review, in accordance with the laws and regulations in force in that Member State, whether the instrument permitting enforcement of the claim is enforceable and has been properly served — Enforcement order not including the date of birth of the debtor and in a language which he does not understand and which is not an official language of the Member State requested

Operative part of the judgment

1.Article 12(3) of Council Directive 76/308/EEC of 15 March 1976 on mutual assistance for the recovery of claims relating to certain levies, duties, taxes and other measures, as amended by Council Directive 2001/44/EC of 15 June 2001, must be interpreted as meaning that the courts of the Member States where the requested authority is situated do not, in principle, have jurisdiction to review the enforceability of an instrument permitting enforcement. Conversely, where a court of that Member State hears a claim against the validity or correctness of the enforcement measures, such as the notification of the instrument permitting enforcement, that court has the power to review whether those measures were correctly effected in accordance with the laws and regulations of that Member State;

2.In the framework of the mutual assistance introduced pursuant to Directive 76/308, as amended by Directive 2001/44, in order for the addressee of an instrument permitting enforcement to be placed in a position to enforce his rights, he must receive the notification of that instrument in an official language of the Member State in which the requested authority is situated. In order to ensure compliance with that right, it is for the national court to apply national law while taking care to ensure the full effectiveness of Community law.

(<span class="super">1</span>) OJ C 209, 15.8.2008.