Karageorgou (Taxation) [2003] EUECJ C-79/02 (06 November 2003)

Karageorgou (Taxation) [2003] EUECJ C-79/02 (06 November 2003)

Amounts mentioned as VAT on invoices by persons who are in an employer-employee relationship with the State cannot be classified as VAT under the Sixth Directive, and Article 21(1)(c) does not preclude reimbursement of such amounts when the services are not subject to VAT.

Citation
[2003] EUECJ C-79/02
Parties
Appellant/respondent: Elliniko Dimosio (the Greek State); Applicant/respondent: Maria Karageorgou; Applicant/respondent: Mrs Petrova; Applicant/respondent: Mr Vlachos
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
06 November 2003
Procedural Posture
Preliminary Ruling (joined Cases C 78/02, C 79/02, C 80/02) / Court of Justice of the European Union (preliminary Reference From Diikitiko Efetio Athinon)
Outcome
Preliminary ruling: Amounts mentioned as VAT by employees are not VAT; reimbursement is not precluded by Article 21(1)(c) of the Sixth Directive.
Legal Topics
Value Added Tax (vat), Sixth Council Directive 77/388/eec, Employer Employee Relationship and Tax Liability, Erroneous Invoicing of VAT, Reimbursement of Unduly Paid Tax
European Union Law Tax Law Value Added Tax (vat) Sixth Council Directive 77/388/eec Employer Employee Relationship and Tax Liability Erroneous Invoicing of VAT Reimbursement of Unduly Paid Tax

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Elliniko Dimosio (the Greek State)

Appellant/respondent

Maria Karageorgou

Applicant/respondent

Mrs Petrova

Applicant/respondent

Mr Vlachos

Applicant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Preliminary Ruling (joined Cases C 78/02, C 79/02, C 80/02) / Court of Justice of the European Union (preliminary Reference From Diikitiko Efetio Athinon)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether amounts mentioned as VAT on invoices by translators working for the State, who are in fact employees, can be classified as VAT under the Sixth Directive.
  2. 2 Whether Article 21(1)(c) of the Sixth Directive precludes reimbursement of amounts mentioned in error as VAT where the services are not subject to VAT.

Ratio Decidendi

Amounts mentioned as VAT on invoices by persons who are in an employer-employee relationship with the State cannot be classified as VAT under the Sixth Directive, and Article 21(1)(c) does not preclude reimbursement of such amounts when the services are not subject to VAT.

Court Disposition

Preliminary ruling: Amounts mentioned as VAT by employees are not VAT; reimbursement is not precluded by Article 21(1)(c) of the Sixth Directive.

Orders

  • The amount mentioned as VAT on an invoice by a person providing services to the State may not be classified as VAT where there is an employer-employee relationship.
  • Article 21(1)(c) of the Sixth Directive does not preclude reimbursement of an amount mentioned in error as VAT where the services are not subject to VAT.