The Google Ireland Case and the Legal Battle over Digital Taxes in the European Union

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 209-220
Author(s):  
Giulio Allevato ◽  
Fernando Pastor-Merchante
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Digital Economy ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Topical Issue ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Battle ◽  
The Way

The preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union in the Google Ireland case turned on the compatibility with the rules on free movement of some of the administrative arrangements put in place by Hungary in order to administer its controversial advertisement tax (namely, the obligation to register and the penalties attached to the failure to comply with that obligation). The preliminary ruling offers some interesting insights on the way in which the Court assesses the compatibility with the freedom to provide services of national administrative arrangements aimed at ensuring the effective collection of taxes. This is a topical issue in the context of the recent efforts made by Member States to tax the digital economy more effectively.

6. The preliminary ruling (Article 267 TFEU)

2020 ◽  
pp. 155-176
Author(s):  
Nigel Foster
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Reference Procedure ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Court Of Justice

This chapter examines the procedural law of the European Union (EU), focusing on Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). It explains that Article 267 is the reference procedure by which courts in member states can endorse questions concerning EU law to the Court of Justice (CJEU). Under this Article, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has the jurisdiction to provide preliminary rulings on the validity and interpretation of acts of the institutions, bodies, offices, or agencies of the Union and on the interpretation of the Treaties. This ensures legal unity.

6. The preliminary ruling (Article 267 TFEU)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nigel Foster
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Reference Procedure ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court

This chapter examines the procedural law of the European Union (EU), focusing on Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). It explains that Article 267 is the reference procedure by which courts in member states can endorse questions concerning EU law to the European Court of Justice (CoJ). Under this Article, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has the jurisdiction to provide preliminary rulings on the validity and interpretation of acts of the institutions, bodies, offices, or agencies of the Union and on the interpretation of the Treaties.

Case C-233/18 Zubair Haqbin v. Federaal Agentschap Voor de Opvang van Asielzoekers (C.J.E.U.)

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
pp. 694-707
Author(s):  
Justine N. Stefanelli
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Violent Behavior ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
First Time ◽  
The Eu

In its preliminary ruling in Haqbin, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU or Court) ruled for the first time on whether the EU Reception Conditions Directive 2013/33 (RCD) prohibits Member States from withdrawing material reception conditions in the event of a breach of the rules of accommodation centers, or in the context of violent behavior within those centers. In holding in the negative, the CJEU affirmed the important role played by fundamental rights in the EU's asylum system.

Recent Golden Share Cases in the Jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 1099-1130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamás Szabados
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Freedom Of Establishment ◽  
Member States ◽  
Golden Share ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Special Rights ◽  
Free Movement Of Capital

AbstractIn several golden share cases, the Court of Justice of the European Union (the “Court”) condemned Member States for reserving certain special rights in privatized companies for themselves. In spite of the Court's consistently strict approach in the golden share cases, the more recent golden share judgments demonstrate that the Court's practice is not free from uncertainties. In its case law, the Court seems to hesitate between the application of the freedom of establishment and the free movement of capital. Additionally, it is not entirely clear which measures are caught by provisions on the freedom of establishment and the free movement of capital.

scholarly journals E-BUSINESS MANAGEMENT - POSSIBILITIES FOR REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Shuleva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Business Management ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Digital Society ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
The Way

The digital society presupposes legal regulation of e-business management. To the extent that this is a state in the process of being created, e-government opens the way to ambiguities and creates heterogeneity. The lack of legal regulation of e-business management can be filled through the request for a preliminary ruling to the Court of Justice of the European Union.

20. Free movement of payments and capital

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorna Woods ◽  
Philippa Watson ◽  
Marios Costa
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Financial Crisis ◽  
Monetary Union ◽  
The Other ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Free Movement Of Capital

This chapter examines the rules concerning free movement of payment and capital within the European Union provided in Articles 63–6 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). It explains the scope of and exceptions to the free movement of capital. The chapter also considers restrictions on free movement of capital between Member States and third countries. It highlights the willingness of the Court of Justice (CJ) to borrow principles from the other freedoms. This chapter also considers briefly the provisions relating to monetary union and the developments in the light of the financial crisis.

CASE-LAW OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION ON MARKET ABUSE AT EUROPEAN LEVEL

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 294-313
Author(s):  
LIBOR KLIMEK ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Parliament ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Level ◽  
Legal Practice ◽  
Member States ◽  
Market Abuse ◽  
Court Of Justice

A set of legislative instruments regulating market abuse have been adopted by the European Union. The principal contemporary legislative instrument in this field, addressed to its Member States, is the Regulation No 596/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council on market abuse. Legislation has been supplemented by the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (formerly known as the Court of Justice of the European Communities). It is a key element for the development of legal practice in all Member States of the European Union. The assessment of case-law on market abuse is therefore needed. The paper analyses relevant cases. In each case at the outset a reference for a preliminary ruling is mentioned. Further, dispute in the main proceedings and the question(s) referred for a preliminary ruling are analysed. The most important parts of analyses are considerations by the Court of Justice and its rulings

scholarly journals Obrót nieruchomościami rolnymi w świetle traktatowej swobody przepływu kapitału – rozważania na gruncie orzecznictwa Trybunału Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej

2020 ◽  
pp. 37-46
Author(s):  
Beata Włodarczyk
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
National Level ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
General Interest ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Free Movement Of Capital

The aim of the article is to outline the legal issues of trading in agricultural property in the European Union, which is entirely subject to basic treaty rules. The free movement of capital, regulated in Article 63 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, is of particular importance in relation to cross-border operations connected with trading in agricultural property. Therefore the legislation in force and applicable in EU Member States should ensure that citizens of other Member States have the possibility of exercising this freedom. However, the free movement of capital is not absolute. In the light of the established case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, regulations limiting free movement of capital may be introduced at national level, provided that they pursue general interest objectives and comply with the principles of proportionality and non-discrimination.

Arbitration cases and preliminary references to the European Court of Justice—an assessment of ‘the Danish Solution’

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 147-155
Author(s):  
Morten Broberg ◽  
Niels Fenger
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
National Court ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Commercial Arbitration ◽  
Member States ◽  
Reference Procedure ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court

Abstract When a case, that is pending before a national court in one of the Member States of the European Union, requires a decision on the interpretation or validity of an EU legal measure, the national court can seek a preliminary ruling on the matter from the European Court of Justice before deciding the main action. In its preliminary ruling, the European Court of Justice establishes authoritatively the interpretation or validity of the relevant EU legislation. When EU law plays a role in commercial arbitration it may be very useful for arbitration tribunals to have access to the preliminary reference procedure. However, according to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, only ‘a court or tribunal of a Member State’ can make a preliminary reference and this notion does not include commercial arbitration tribunals. In order to give arbitration tribunals access to the preliminary reference procedure Denmark has introduced a scheme which allows them to ask the ordinary Danish courts to make preliminary references on behalf of the arbitration tribunal. This article explains the Danish scheme and considers to what extent it provides a useful model for other Member States.

18. Free movement of payments and capital

2020 ◽  
pp. 417-435
Author(s):  
Marios Costa ◽  
Steve Peers
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Financial Crisis ◽  
The Other ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Rule Of Reason ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Economic Union ◽  
Free Movement Of Capital

This chapter examines the rules concerning free movement of payment and capital within the European Union provided in Articles 63, 64, 65 and 66 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). It explains the scope of and derogations to the free movement of capital. The chapter also considers restrictions on free movement of capital between Member States and third countries. It highlights the willingness of the Court of Justice (CJ) to borrow principles (i.e. rule of reason) from the other freedoms. This chapter also considers briefly the provisions relating to monetary and economic union and the developments in the light of the financial crisis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document