VATcodexEU VAT case law · Court of Justice and General Court

Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial EU VAT case law

10 cases of the Court of Justice and the General Court of the European Union on this point of VAT law, from 2015 to 2025.

Search within this topicThe cases ↓

Provisions these cases interpret most

The 10 cases, most recent first

Under each case, what the Court decided, from its summary. The summaries are AI-generated and are not official documents: open the case for the Court’s own text.

C-475/24 Fashion TV RO and Maestro

Order · 12 November 2025 · Romania

Use of criminal evidence in deduction disputes after proceedings against directors are discontinued

By reasoned order under Article 99, the Court held that the national court must verify that the substantive and formal conditions for deduction are met and may, to that end, examine evidence obtained in earlier criminal proceedings against persons distinct from the taxable person, provided the rights guaranteed by EU law, notably equality of arms and the rights of the defence, are respected. Discontinuance of those proceedings is irrelevant. The ne bis in idem question was inadmissible. Directors are not the same person as the company. The legal certainty limb was inadmissible for inadequate reasons. Confirms that a discontinued or time-barred criminal case against directors gives a company no immunity in the parallel VAT assessment.

C-605/23 Ati-19

Judgment · 3 July 2025 · Bulgaria

Judicial review of provisional sealing of business premises

Article 47 precludes such rules. Interim judicial protection is not effective if the court cannot also examine, in fact and in law, whether the application is supported by arguments disclosing prima facie unlawfulness of the measure. Otherwise suspension could be refused even against a manifestly unlawful sealing. The national court must interpret domestic procedural law accordingly and, if that is impossible, disapply the provisions preventing such an assessment, Article 47 having direct effect. Confirms that sealing of premises for till receipt failures is an implementation of Articles 2 and 273 of the VAT Directive, so Charter guarantees apply to both imposition and immediate enforcement. Relevant to advisers in any Member State whose interim relief rules exclude a summary legality check for coercive VAT enforcement measures of a criminal nature.

C-262/24 Pegazus Busz

Order · 12 February 2025 · Hungary

Evidence of fraud must be put to the taxable person, and a lower court may depart from binding directions

Ruling by order, the Court declared several of the questions manifestly inadmissible or answerable from existing case law. On the merits it held that Article 47 of the Charter requires the taxable person to have knowledge of, and to be able to debate on an adversarial basis before the national court, the evidence on which the administration relies to find participation in evasion. It further held that the primacy of EU law and Article 267 TFEU oblige the national court to set aside directions it considers contrary to EU law, without being required to make a preliminary reference first. Two points of real practical weight in fraud cases.

C-615/21 Napfény-Toll

Judgment · 13 July 2023 · Hungary

Suspension of the assessment limitation period during judicial review

Neither principle precludes such legislation or practice, even where repetition results from the authority's failure to comply with binding judicial guidance. Regulation No 2988/95 does not apply, as VAT is not collected directly on behalf of the European Union. Limitation rules remain for Member States. The qualification is that the principle of sound administration and Article 47 of the Charter require a reasonable overall duration, but excessive length justifies annulment only where it actually impaired the taxpayer's ability to defend itself, which will be exceptional. Taxpayers in Member States with open-ended suspension rules cannot rely on legal certainty alone to defeat assessments issued many years after the periods concerned, even where the delay is the authority's fault. Relevant to advisers handling long-running Hungarian deduction and fraud disputes, and to anyone assuming Regulation No 2988/95 caps VAT limitation periods.

C-97/21 MV - 98

Judgment · 4 May 2023 · Bulgaria

Cumulation of a fine and sealing of business premises for the same VAT offence

Article 273 and Article 50 of the Charter preclude such legislation where the two measures, both criminal in nature on the Bonda criteria, are imposed automatically for the same offence in separate procedures, are challengeable before different courts, and the legislation neither coordinates those procedures so as to limit the additional burden to what is strictly necessary nor ensures that the combined severity matches the seriousness of the offence. The second question fell away. The third was inadmissible for want of a link to the main proceedings. Relevant to anyone advising on cash register and receipt obligations in Member States that pair fines with business closure, sealing or licence measures.

C-512/21 Aquila Part Prod Com

Judgment · 1 December 2022 · Hungary

Proving participation in carousel fraud and the limits of the duty of diligence

The authority cannot rely merely on the existence of a circular invoicing chain. It must accurately describe the constituent elements of the fraud, prove the fraudulent conduct and establish either active participation or that the taxable person knew or ought to have known, though it need not identify every operator. Where fraud indicators exist, greater diligence may be required, but not complex checks equivalent to the authority's own investigations. Food safety breaches cannot alone justify refusal, but may be one element among others. Relevant to any business facing deduction refusals in chain transaction cases, particularly in Hungary and in the food sector.

C-582/20 SC Cridar Cons

Judgment · 24 February 2022 · Romania

Suspension of a tax appeal pending criminal proceedings

No preclusion, subject to three conditions: the suspension must not push the complaint beyond a reasonable time. The suspension decision must state its reasons in fact and law and be open to judicial review, and, if the refusal turns out to breach EU law, the taxable person must be repaid within a reasonable time with default interest where appropriate. Suspension of enforcement need not be automatic, but must be available where there is serious doubt as to lawfulness and serious, irreparable harm would otherwise result. Confirms that tax authorities may pause appeal proceedings to await criminal evidence, but fences the practice.

C-189/18 Glencore Agriculture Hungary

Judgment · 16 October 2019

Findings made against suppliers, and the conditions for using them against the customer

The Court held that such legislation or practice is not precluded, subject to three conditions. First, it must not relieve the tax authority of the obligation to disclose to the taxable person the evidence, including evidence originating in the related procedures, on which it intends to base its decision, and the taxable person must not be deprived of the right effectively to challenge those findings of fact and legal classifications in the procedure brought against him. Second, the taxable person must be able to have access, during that procedure, to all the evidence obtained in the related or other procedures on which the authority intends to rely or which may assist the exercise of the rights of the defence, unless objectives of public interest justify restricting access. Third, the court hearing the action against the decision must be able to review the legality of the way that evidence was obtained and used, and the findings in the decisions taken against the suppliers that are decisive for the outcome. The judgment accepts the administrative economy of reusing findings made against suppliers, but attaches to it a set of conditions that operate at three separate stages: disclosure by the authority, access by the taxable person, and review by the court.

C-543/14 Ordre des barreaux francophones et germanophone and Others

Judgment · 28 July 2016 · Belgium

VAT on lawyers' services and access to justice

Nothing affects the validity of those provisions. Article 47 does not confer a right to exemption for clients deemed to have sufficient resources. VAT can be challenged only if the cost is an insurmountable obstacle, and equality of arms does not require parties to bear equal financial costs. Aarhus Article 9(4) and (5) are not unconditional and sufficiently precise, so cannot be relied on. Legal aid work is not exempt. Lawyers are not bodies recognised as devoted to social wellbeing, such work being voluntary and one objective among many. Confirms that Member States abandoning the Article 371 grandfathered exemption for lawyers face no fundamental rights obstacle, and closes off exemption for court-appointed or legal aid work under Article 132(1)(g), consistent with the earlier refusal of a reduced rate. Relevant to law firms and their advisers in any Member State reviewing legal aid billing, and to publicly funded panel work generally.

C-419/14 WebMindLicenses

Judgment · 17 December 2015 · Hungary

Offshore licensing of website know-how and abuse of rights

Common ownership, the licensor's founder exercising influence over the know-how and its exploitation, use of subcontractors and the licensor's own motives are not decisive. Abuse requires proof of a wholly artificial arrangement, assessed by whether the licensee genuinely had premises, human and technical resources and acted in its own name, on its own behalf, at its own risk. VAT paid abroad does not bar adjustment. A cooperation request is required where useful or essential. Covert criminal evidence may be used only if lawfully obtained and used, proportionate, and disclosed with a hearing. Otherwise it must be disregarded. Confirms that rate arbitrage through an offshore licensee is not abusive per se. Relevant to digital, gaming and adult content operators using Madeira or similar structures, and to intellectual property licensing generally.

Related topics

Origin and scope of right of deduction · Right of deduction · Tax evasion and abuse · Obligations of taxable persons · Ne bis in idem · Direct effect · Proof · Rights of the defence · Right to be heard · Scope of the Charter of Fundamental Rights