Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 22.01.2009 - 3991/03 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2009,51989) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichung
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
\
Art. 41, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1, Protokoll Nr. 1 Art. 1 Abs. 1 MRK
Violation of P1-1 Pecuniary damage - award Non-pecuniary damage - finding of a violation sufficient (englisch)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 22.01.2009 - 3991/03
- EGMR, 12.05.2015 - 3991/03
Wird zitiert von ... Neu Zitiert selbst (13)
- EGMR, 08.07.1986 - 9006/80
LITHGOW AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 22.01.2009 - 3991/03
Accordingly, the Court cannot fail to exercise its power of review and must determine whether the requisite balance was maintained in a manner consonant with the applicant company's right to "the peaceful enjoyment of [its] possessions", within the meaning of the first sentence of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (see Sporrong and Lönnroth, cited above, § 69; Lithgow and Others v. the United Kingdom, 8 July 1986, §§ 121-22, Series A no. 102; and Intersplav v. Ukraine, no. 803/02, § 38, 9 January 2007). - EGMR, 23.09.1982 - 7151/75
SPORRONG ET LÖNNROTH c. SUÈDE
Auszug aus EGMR, 22.01.2009 - 3991/03
However, in determining whether this requirement has been met, it is recognised that a Contracting State, not least when framing and implementing policies in the area of taxation, enjoys a wide margin of appreciation, and the Court will respect the legislature's assessment in such matters unless it is devoid of reasonable foundation (see Sporrong and Lönnroth v. Sweden, 23 September 1982, § 69, Series A no. 52; National & Provincial Building Society, Leeds Permanent Building Society and Yorkshire Building Society, cited above, § 80; and M.A. and 34 Others v. Finland (dec.), no. 27793/95, 10 June 2003). - EGMR, 29.11.1991 - 12742/87
PINE VALLEY DEVELOPMENTS LTD ET AUTRES c. IRLANDE
Auszug aus EGMR, 22.01.2009 - 3991/03
Thus, the Court considers that the applicant company's right to claim a deduction of the input VAT amounted to at least a "legitimate expectation" of obtaining effective enjoyment of a property right amounting to a "possession" within the meaning of the first sentence of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (see, mutatis mutandis, Pine Valley Developments Ltd and Others v. Ireland, 29 November 1991, § 51, Series A no. 222; S.A. Dangeville v. France, no. 36677/97, § 48, ECHR 2002-III; Cabinet Diot and S.A. Gras Savoye v. France, nos. 49217/99 and 49218/99, § 26, 22 July 2003; and Aon Conseil and Courtage S.A. and Christian de Clarens S.A. v. France, no. 70160/01, § 45, ECHR 2007-...).
- EGMR, 16.04.2002 - 36677/97
S.A. DANGEVILLE c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 22.01.2009 - 3991/03
Thus, the Court considers that the applicant company's right to claim a deduction of the input VAT amounted to at least a "legitimate expectation" of obtaining effective enjoyment of a property right amounting to a "possession" within the meaning of the first sentence of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (see, mutatis mutandis, Pine Valley Developments Ltd and Others v. Ireland, 29 November 1991, § 51, Series A no. 222; S.A. Dangeville v. France, no. 36677/97, § 48, ECHR 2002-III; Cabinet Diot and S.A. Gras Savoye v. France, nos. 49217/99 and 49218/99, § 26, 22 July 2003; and Aon Conseil and Courtage S.A. and Christian de Clarens S.A. v. France, no. 70160/01, § 45, ECHR 2007-...). - EGMR, 25.01.2007 - 70160/01
AON CONSEIL ET COURTAGE S.A. AND CHRISTIAN DE CLARENS S.A. v. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 22.01.2009 - 3991/03
Thus, the Court considers that the applicant company's right to claim a deduction of the input VAT amounted to at least a "legitimate expectation" of obtaining effective enjoyment of a property right amounting to a "possession" within the meaning of the first sentence of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (see, mutatis mutandis, Pine Valley Developments Ltd and Others v. Ireland, 29 November 1991, § 51, Series A no. 222; S.A. Dangeville v. France, no. 36677/97, § 48, ECHR 2002-III; Cabinet Diot and S.A. Gras Savoye v. France, nos. 49217/99 and 49218/99, § 26, 22 July 2003; and Aon Conseil and Courtage S.A. and Christian de Clarens S.A. v. France, no. 70160/01, § 45, ECHR 2007-...). - EGMR, 22.07.2003 - 49217/99
SA CABINET DIOT ET SA GRAS SAVOYE c. FRANCE
Auszug aus EGMR, 22.01.2009 - 3991/03
Thus, the Court considers that the applicant company's right to claim a deduction of the input VAT amounted to at least a "legitimate expectation" of obtaining effective enjoyment of a property right amounting to a "possession" within the meaning of the first sentence of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (see, mutatis mutandis, Pine Valley Developments Ltd and Others v. Ireland, 29 November 1991, § 51, Series A no. 222; S.A. Dangeville v. France, no. 36677/97, § 48, ECHR 2002-III; Cabinet Diot and S.A. Gras Savoye v. France, nos. 49217/99 and 49218/99, § 26, 22 July 2003; and Aon Conseil and Courtage S.A. and Christian de Clarens S.A. v. France, no. 70160/01, § 45, ECHR 2007-...). - EGMR, 07.12.1976 - 5493/72
HANDYSIDE v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
Auszug aus EGMR, 22.01.2009 - 3991/03
Following this line of thought, according to the Government, the Court had stated in its judgment in the case of Handyside v. the United Kingdom (7 December 1976, Series A no. 24) that the second paragraph of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 "sets the Contracting States up as sole judges of the "necessity" for an interference" (ibid., § 62). - EuGH, 06.07.2006 - C-439/04
Kittel - Sechste Mehrwertsteuerrichtlinie - Vorsteuerabzug - Karussellbetrug - …
- EuGH, 12.01.2006 - C-354/03
GESELLSCHAFTEN, DIE OHNE IHR WISSEN IN EINEN "KARUSSELLBETRUG" VERWICKELT WAREN, …
Auszug aus EGMR, 22.01.2009 - 3991/03
In its judgment of 12 January 2006 in joined cases C-354/03, C-355/03 and C-484/03, Optigen Ltd (C-354/03), Fulcrum Electronics Ltd (C-355/03) and Bond House Systems Ltd (C-484/03) v Commissioners of Customs & Excise: reference for a preliminary ruling from the High Court of Justice (England & Wales), Chancery Division - United Kingdom, European Court Reports (ECR) 2006, page I-00483, the CJEC concluded as follows:. - EGMR, 24.10.1986 - 9118/80
AGOSI c. ROYAUME-UNI
Auszug aus EGMR, 22.01.2009 - 3991/03
They further noted that such measures were legitimate when they were provided for in a statute or other normative act, and considered that a State enjoyed considerable freedom in determining the "laws... it deems necessary to control the use of property" as provided in the second paragraph of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (the Government referred to AGOSI v. the United Kingdom 24 October 1986, § 52, Series A no. 108). - EGMR, 07.07.1989 - 10873/84
TRE TRAKTÖRER AKTIEBOLAG v. SWEDEN
- EGMR, 20.11.1995 - 17849/91
PRESSOS COMPANIA NAVIERA S.A. ET AUTRES c. BELGIQUE
- EGMR, 10.07.2002 - 39794/98
GRATZINGER ET GRATZINGEROVA c. REPUBLIQUE TCHEQUE
- Generalanwalt beim EuGH, 19.12.2019 - C-446/18
AGROBET CZ - Vorabentscheidungsersuchen - Steuerrecht - Mehrwertsteuer - Art. 179 …
21 EGMR, Urteile vom 7. Juli 2011 - 39766/05, Rn. 32 ff. -, Serkov/Ukraine, und vom 22. Januar 2009 -, 3991/03, Rn. 57 - Bulves/Bulgaria.
Rechtsprechung
| EGMR, 12.05.2015 - 3991/03, 6689/03 |
Zitiervorschläge
Tipp: Um den Kurzlink (hier: https://dejure.org/2015,23476) schnell in die Zwischenablage zu kopieren, können Sie die Tastenkombination Alt + R verwenden - auch ohne diesen Bereich zu öffnen.
Volltextveröffentlichungen (2)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
BULVES AD ET 1 AUTRE AFFAIRE CONTRE LA BULGARIE
Informations fournies par le gouvernement concernant les mesures prises permettant d'éviter de nouvelles violations. Versement des sommes prévues dans l'arrêt (französisch)
- Europäischer Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte
BULVES AD AND 1 OTHER CASE AGAINST BULGARIA
Information given by the government concerning measures taken to prevent new violations. Payment of the sums provided for in the judgment (englisch)
Verfahrensgang
- EGMR, 22.01.2009 - 3991/03
- EGMR, 12.05.2015 - 3991/03, 6689/03
Wird zitiert von ... (4)
- EGMR, 19.09.2017 - 10114/06
OOO KHABAROVSKAYA TOPLIVNAYA KOMPANIYA c. RUSSIE
En effet, ce non-paiement de la TVA par les fournisseurs n'était pas en l'espèce le seul « manquement'que les autorités internes reprochaient à la société requérante, comme c'était le cas dans l'affaire « Bulves'AD, précitée, et dans l'affaire Business Support Centre c. Bulgarie, no 6689/03, 18 mars 2010. - EGMR, 07.12.2023 - 26604/16
WALDNER c. FRANCE
En conséquence, toute ingérence, y compris celle résultant d'une mesure tendant à assurer le paiement de l'impôt, doit ménager un « juste équilibre'entre les impératifs de l'intérêt général et ceux de la sauvegarde des droits fondamentaux de l'individu (S.A. Dangeville c. France, no 36677/97, § 52, CEDH 2002-III, et « Bulves'AD c. Bulgarie, no 3991/03, § 62, 22 janvier 2009). - EGMR, 17.03.2020 - 55887/07
EDATA-TRANS S.R.L. c. RÉPUBLIQUE DE MOLDOVA
Enfin, elle invite la Cour à suivre dans son affaire la même approche que dans l'affaire « Bulves'AD c. Bulgarie (no 3991/03, §§ 53-71, 22 janvier 2009). - EGMR, 07.12.2017 - 6046/08
ATANASOV c. BULGARIE
Il expose que, dans sa jurisprudence constante relative à l'article 1 du Protocole no 1 à la Convention, la Cour reconnaît que les États disposent d'une large marge d'appréciation dans l'adoption des lois nécessaires à assurer le paiement des impôts et des amendes (Gasus Dosier - und Fördertechnik GmbH c. Pays-Bas, 23 février 1995, § 60, série A no 306-B, AGOSI c. Royaume-Uni, 24 octobre 1986, § 52, série A no 108, et « Bulves'AD c. Bulgarie, no 3991/03, § 63, 22 janvier 2009).