- 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
Case C-3/24, MISTRAL TRANS: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Senāts) (Latvia) lodged on 4 January 2024 – SIA MISTRAL TRANS v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62024CN0003
62024CN0003
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
Official Journal of the European Union
C series
—
C/2024/2410
8.4.2024
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Augstākā tiesa (Senāts) (Latvia) lodged on 4 January 2024 — SIA MISTRAL TRANS v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests
(Case C-3/24, MISTRAL TRANS)
(C/2024/2410)
Language of the case: Latvian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant at first instance and appellant: SIA MISTRAL TRANS
Defendant at first instance and respondent: Valsts ieņēmumu dienests
Questions referred
1.Must the term ‘external accountant’ in point (a) of Article 2(1)(3) of Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC (1) be interpreted as meaning that it is also applicable to cases in which the accounting services are provided solely to persons related to the external accountant?
2.If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, must Article 58(1) of Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC, be interpreted as meaning that, in the context of the proportionality of the sanction imposed, the following facts are relevant: (1) the accounting service is provided solely to persons related to the person providing the service; (2) the choice to carry out the accounting by taking on an external accountant depends on efficiency considerations, within a group of related undertakings, and is not determined by criteria derived from legislation or criteria based on economic reality?
—
Language of the case: Latvian
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/2410/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)
—