Skip to content

GlobalLawDBby GenieAI

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Search the text of the law

Log in Get an API key

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Log in Get an API key

The Global Law Database. Free to read, built for people and AI agents.

Explore

All laws
Search the text
Sanctions
Map of connections
Compare UK and EU

Developers

AI agents (MCP)
REST API
Bulk data
API keys

Coverage

United Kingdom
European Union
United States
Canada
Australia
France
Germany
Netherlands
Spain
Austria
Norway
Finland
Switzerland
Ireland

GlobalLawDB is made by GenieAI, London. It is not legal advice: check the official text before relying on it. Text comes from official publishers under their licences, listed on the Data page.

ThemeMatch my systemLightDark

European Union
Kingdom of Belgium and Forum 187 ASBL v Commission of the European Communities (C-182/03, C-217/03)
Judgment
The merits of the actions
The claims of Forum 187 for the annulm…
The plea alleging infringement of Arti…
—The method of assessment of the tax r…
81

Kingdom of Belgium and Forum 187 ASBL v Commission of the European Communities (C-182/03, C-217/03)

Judgment of 22 Jun 2006law://eu/cjeu/2003/c-182-03/para_81@2026-11-10

81It should be pointed out, first, that rules relating to tax are not excluded from the scope of Article 87 EC.

Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Second Chamber
Cases: C-182/03, C-217/03 · ECLI:EU:C:2006:416
Decided: 22 Jun 2006
Procedure: Action for annulment
Applicants: Kingdom of Belgium; Forum 187 ASBL
Defendant: Commission of the European Communities
Rapporteur: P. Kūris
Advocate General: P. Léger
Bench: 5 judges
C.W.A. Timmermans, J. Makarczyk, R. Schintgen, P. Kūris, J. Klučka
Language: French
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62003CJ0182

Topics

History · 1 version

22 Jun 2006Reading

Connections

Cited by 13: Neottolemo, Lda (Zona Franca da Madeira) and Register.com LP - Sucursal em Portugal (Zona Franca da Madeira) v European Commission (T-724/22); European Commission v Ireland and Apple Sales International (C-465/20 P); Unilab LP v European Union Intellectual Property Office (T-288/23); Fiat Chrysler Finance Europe and Ireland v European Commission (C-885/19 P)6 provisions; Francesca Corneli v European Central Bank (T-502/19); Mead Johnson Nutrition (Asia Pacific) Pte Ltd and Others v European Commission (T-508/19)2 provisions; Genekam Biotechnology AG v European Commission (T-579/20); Google LLC, formerly Google Inc. and Alphabet, Inc. v European Commission (T-612/17); Dansk Erhverv v European Commission (T-47/19); Grand Duchy of Luxembourg , Amazon EU Sàrl and Amazon.com, Inc. v European Commission (T-816/17, T-318/18)5 provisions; Grand Duchy of Luxembourg and Others v European Commission (T-516/18, T-525/18)2 provisions; ITD, Brancheorganisation for den danske vejgodstransport A/S and Danske Fragtmænd A/S v European Commission (T-561/18); European Commission v Hungary (C-596/19 P)2 provisions
Cites 22: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016)4 provisions; Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty; Plaumann & Co. v Commission of the European Economic Community (C-25/62); Banco de Crédito Industrial SA, now Banco Exterior de España SA v Ayuntamiento de Valencia (C-387/92); Comité International de la Rayonne et des Fibres Synthétiques and others v Commission of the European Communities (C-313/90); Fintan Duff, Liam Finlay, Thomas Julian, James Lyons, Catherine Moloney, Michael McCarthy, Patrick McCarthy, James O'Regan, Patrick O'Donovan v Minister for Agriculture and Food and Attorney General (C-63/93); Kingdom of Belgium v Commission of the European Communities (C-75/97); Philip Morris Holland BV v Commission of the European Communities (C-730/79); Council Directive 69/335/EEC of 17 July 1969 concerning indirect taxes on the raising of capital; Wolfgang Heiser v Finanzamt Innsbruck (C-172/03); Codorníu SA v Council of the European Union (C-309/89); Sofrimport SARL v Commission of the European Communities (C-152/88); Hellenic Republic v Commission of the European Communities (C-278/00); Van den Bergh en Jurgens BV and Van Dijk Food Products (Lopik) BV v Commission of the European Communities (C-265/85); Ireland v Commission of the European Communities (C-325/85); Société nouvelle des usines de Pontlieue - Aciéries du Temple (S.N.U.P.A.T.) v High Authority of the European Coal and Steel Community (C-42/59); Ministère de l'Économie, des Finances et de l'Industrie v GEMO SA (C-126/01); Affish BV v Rijksdienst voor de keuring van Vee en Vlees (C-183/95); SA Piraiki-Patraiki and others v Commission of the European Communities (C-11/82); French Republic v Commission of the European Communities (C-259/85); Altmark Trans GmbH and Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg v Nahverkehrsgesellschaft Altmark GmbH, and Oberbundesanwalt beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht (C-280/00); Italian Republic v Commission of the European Communities (C-310/99)