Compagnie Commerciale de l'Ouest y otros contra Receveur principal des douanes de La Pallice Port.

• Jurisdiction: European Union
• Court: Court of Justice (European Union)
• Writing for the Court: Kakouris
• ECLI: ECLI:EU:C:1992:118
• Docket Number: C-80/90,,C-79/90,,C-82/90,C-78/90,,C-81/90,,C-83/90
• Date: 11 March 1992
• Procedure Type: Reference for a preliminary ruling

Avis juridique important

|

61990J0078

Judgment of the Court of 11 March 1992. - Compagnie Commerciale de l'Ouest and others v Receveur Principal des Douanes de La Pallice Port. - References for a preliminary ruling: Cour d'appel de Poitiers - France. - Parafiscal charges on petroleum products. - Joined cases C-78/90, C-79/90, C-80/90, C-81/90, C-82/90 and C-83/90.

European Court reports 1992 Page I-01847

Summary
Parties
Grounds
Decision on costs
Operative part

Keywords

++++

1. Free movement of goods - Customs duties - Charges having equivalent effect - Internal taxation - Parafiscal charge levied on domestic and imported products but benefiting only domestic products - Basis for classification - Article 30 of the Treaty not applicable

(EEC Treaty, Arts 12, 30 and 95)

2. State aids - Concept - Parafiscal charge levied on domestic and imported products but benefiting only domestic products - Included - Conditions

(EEC Treaty, Arts 92 and 93)

3. State monopoly of a commercial character - Parafiscal charge unconnected with the exercise of the exclusive rights existing under a monopoly - Article 37 of the Treaty not applicable

(EEC Treaty, Art. 37)

Summary

1. A parafiscal charge applied under the same conditions as regards its collection to both domestic and imported products, the revenue from which is used for the benefit of domestic products only, so that the advantages accruing from it wholly offset the charge borne by those products, constitutes a charge having an effect equivalent to customs duties prohibited by Article 12 of the EEC Treaty. If, on the other hand, those advantages only partly offset the charge borne by domestic products, the charge in question constitutes discriminatory taxation prohibited by Article 95 of the Treaty, the collection of which is prohibited as regards the proportion of it used to offset the burden of the charge borne by domestic products.

Such a parafiscal charge, being governed by Article 12 et seq. or Article 95 of the Treaty, is not governed by Article 30 thereof.

2. A parafiscal charge applied under the same conditions as regards its collection to both domestic and imported products, the revenue from which is used for the benefit of domestic products only, so that the advantages accruing from it wholly offset the charge borne by those products, may, depending on how the revenue from it is used, constitute State aid incompatible with the common market if the conditions for the application of Article 92 of the Treaty are met, it being understood that a finding that those conditions are met must be made in accordance with the procedure laid down for that purpose in Article 93 of the Treaty.

3. Article 37 of the Treaty does not prohibit the introduction of a parafiscal charge which is created independently of the rules governing the importation and marketing of petroleum in force in a Member State and is unconnected with the exercise of the exclusive rights provided for by those rules.

Parties

In Joined Cases C-78/90 to C-83/90,

REFERENCE to the Court under Article 177 of the EEC Treaty by Cour d' Appel (Appeal Court), Poitiers, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between

Compagnie Commerciale de l' Ouest and Others

and

Receveur Principal des Douanes de La Pallice Port

on the interpretation of Articles 3, 5, 6, 12, 13, 30, the first paragraph of Article 31, the first paragraph of Article 32, the second paragraph of Article 37, and Articles 92 and 95 of the EEC Treaty,

THE COURT,

composed of: O. Due, President, F.A. Schockweiler and F. Grévisse (Presidents of Chambers), C.N. Kakouris, J.C. Moitinho de Almeida, M. Díez de Velasco and M. Zuleeg, Judges,

Advocate General: G. Tesauro,

Registrar: H.A. Ruehl, Principal Administrator,

after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of:

- Compagnie Commerciale de l' Ouest, Société Montenay, Société Propétrol and Société Picoty, the plaintiffs in the main proceedings, represented by C. Imbach, of the Strasbourg and Brussels Bars,

- the French Government, represented by P. Pouzoulet, Sous-Directeur, Direction des Affaires Juridiques, and G. de Bergues, Sécrétaire-Adjoint Principal des Affaires Etrangères, acting as Agents,

- the Commission of the European Communities, by its Legal Adviser, J. Sack, and by H. Lehman, a French civil servant seconded to the Commission, acting as Agents,

having regard to the Report for the Hearing,

after hearing the oral observations of Compagnie Commerciale de l' Ouest, Société Montenay, Société Propétrol and Société Picoty, and the Commission at the hearing on 13 June 1991,

after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 11 July 1991,

gives the following

Judgment

Grounds

1 By judgments of 14 January 1990, received at the Court on 22 March 1990, the Cour d' Appel, Poitiers, referred to the Court for a preliminary ruling under Article 177 of the EEC Treaty a number of questions on the interpretation of Articles 3, 5, 6, 12, 13, 30, the first paragraph of Article 31, the first paragraph of Article 32, the second paragraph of Article 37, and Articles 92 and 95 of the EEC Treaty.

2 Those questions were raised in proceedings between a number of undertakings trading in petroleum products and the French customs administration concerning the legality of a parafiscal charge levied in France on certain petroleum products.

3 It appears from the documents before the Court that the ex-refinery prices for petroleum products in France were fixed by the administrative authorities on the basis of various factors, including the parity of the United States dollar, the currency of settlement for crude oil transactions on the international markets. The retail prices of those products were also fixed by the administrative authorities on the basis of various factors, including...