Advanced

Abuse of rights in EU VAT - The Court’s tool to introduce a new general principle of EU Law

Slegtenhorst, Peter LU (2015) JAEM03 20151
Department of Law
Abstract
The principle of prohibition of abuse of EU law has developed throughout a variety of areas of EU law, but has for the last few years most specifically evolved into an overriding principle through the field of EU VAT.

The questions that have arisen along the lines of the Court’s interpretation mainly assess the relation with legal certainty and the division of powers. When looking at the cases of Maks Pen and Italmoda without prior engagement in the abuse of rights doctrine, one is inclined to question its compliance with these core principles underpinning the EU legal order. However, by the Court’s gradual extension of the scope of the principle of prohibition of abuse of EU law, through Halifax and Kofoed, the current scope of... (More)
The principle of prohibition of abuse of EU law has developed throughout a variety of areas of EU law, but has for the last few years most specifically evolved into an overriding principle through the field of EU VAT.

The questions that have arisen along the lines of the Court’s interpretation mainly assess the relation with legal certainty and the division of powers. When looking at the cases of Maks Pen and Italmoda without prior engagement in the abuse of rights doctrine, one is inclined to question its compliance with these core principles underpinning the EU legal order. However, by the Court’s gradual extension of the scope of the principle of prohibition of abuse of EU law, through Halifax and Kofoed, the current scope of application has become defendable to a certain extent. The Court appears to have struck the balance right between legal certainty and the needs of the Internal Market in general, although the case in Italmoda must be considered to be a flaw within that process.

When looking at the principle from a notional standpoint, one cannot conclude differently than that it has ascended to a level of constitutional value. The principle of non-abuse possesses the elements academically designated to general principles of EU law. However, the full and direct application against individuals appears to still be a bridge too far at this time, due to a remaining lack of unified recognition in all layers of the EU legal order. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Slegtenhorst, Peter LU
supervisor
organization
course
JAEM03 20151
year
type
H2 - Master's Degree (Two Years)
subject
keywords
Legal certainty., Principle of prohibition of abuse of EU law, Tax law, Abuse of rights, General principle, VAT, EU
language
English
id
7456072
date added to LUP
2015-07-06 13:55:34
date last changed
2015-07-06 13:55:34
@misc{7456072,
  abstract     = {The principle of prohibition of abuse of EU law has developed throughout a variety of areas of EU law, but has for the last few years most specifically evolved into an overriding principle through the field of EU VAT.

The questions that have arisen along the lines of the Court’s interpretation mainly assess the relation with legal certainty and the division of powers. When looking at the cases of Maks Pen and Italmoda without prior engagement in the abuse of rights doctrine, one is inclined to question its compliance with these core principles underpinning the EU legal order. However, by the Court’s gradual extension of the scope of the principle of prohibition of abuse of EU law, through Halifax and Kofoed, the current scope of application has become defendable to a certain extent. The Court appears to have struck the balance right between legal certainty and the needs of the Internal Market in general, although the case in Italmoda must be considered to be a flaw within that process.

When looking at the principle from a notional standpoint, one cannot conclude differently than that it has ascended to a level of constitutional value. The principle of non-abuse possesses the elements academically designated to general principles of EU law. However, the full and direct application against individuals appears to still be a bridge too far at this time, due to a remaining lack of unified recognition in all layers of the EU legal order.},
  author       = {Slegtenhorst, Peter},
  keyword      = {Legal certainty.,Principle of prohibition of abuse of EU law,Tax law,Abuse of rights,General principle,VAT,EU},
  language     = {eng},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Abuse of rights in EU VAT - The Court’s tool to introduce a new general principle of EU Law},
  year         = {2015},
}