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
Tibor Farkas v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Dél-alfödi Regionális Adó Főigazgatósága (C-564/15)
Judgment
Consideration of the questions referred
The first question
49

Tibor Farkas v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Dél-alfödi Regionális Adó Főigazgatósága (C-564/15)

Judgment of 26 Apr 2017law://eu/cjeu/2015/c-564-15/para_49@2026-11-10

49However, Mr Farkas may claim reimbursement of the tax unduly paid to the seller of the mobile hangar in accordance with national law (see, to that effect, judgment of 6 February 2014, Fatorie, C‑424/12, EU:C:2014:50, paragraph 42).

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

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Fourth Chamber
Case: C-564/15 · ECLI:EU:C:2017:302
Decided: 26 Apr 2017
Procedure: Preliminary reference · referred by the Kecskeméti közigazgatási és munkaügyi bíróság (Administrative and Labour Court, Kecskemét, Hungary)
Applicant: Tibor Farkas
Defendant: Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Dél-alföldi Regionális Adó Főigazgatósága
Rapporteur: C. Lycourgos
Advocate General: M. Bobek
Bench: 5 judges
T. von Danwitz, E. Juhász, C. Vajda, K. Jürimäe, C. Lycourgos
Language: Hungarian
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62015CJ0564

Topics

Value added tax

History · 1 version

26 Apr 2017Reading

Connections

Interprets 1: Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax
Cited by 21: NE v Bezirkshauptmannschaft Hartberg-Fürstenfeld (C-205/20); Proceedings brought by W.Ż (C-487/19); X and Z v Autoriteit Persoonsgegevens (C-245/20); SIA 'Zinātnes parks' v Finanšu ministrija (C-347/20); Kreuzmayr GmbH v Finanzamt Linz (C-628/16)2 provisions; CTT - Correios de Portugal v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira (C-661/18); Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Galaţi - Administraţia Judeţeană a Finanţelor Publice Vrancea and Direcţia Generală de Administrare a Marilor Contribuabili v Greentech S.A (C-640/23)3 provisions; Gabel Industria Tessile SpA and Canavesi SpA v A2A Energia SpA and Others (C-316/22); Michael Schütte v Finanzamt Brilon (C-453/22); Eco Advocacy CLG v An Bord Pleanála (C-721/21); SA Cezam v État belge (C-418/22); HUMDA Magyar Autó-Motorsport Fejlesztési Ügynökség Zrt. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága (C-397/21)2 provisions; Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Bucureşti - Administraţia Sector 1 a Finanţelor Publice v VB and Direcţia Generalā Regionalā a Finanţelor Publice Bucureşti -Serviciul Soluţionare Contestaţii 1 (C-146/21); Ferimet SL v Administración General del Estado (C-281/20); Grupa Warzywna Sp. z o.o. v Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej we Wrocławiu (C-935/19); BT v Balgarska Narodna Banka (C-501/18); SC Terracult SRL v Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Timişoara –Administraţia Judeţeană a Finanţelor Publice Arad – Serviciul Inspecţie Fiscală Persoane Juridice 5 and ANAF Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Timişoara Serviciul de Soluţionare a Contestaţiilor (C-835/18); VG Media Gesellschaft zur Verwertung der Urheber- und Leistungsschutzrechte von Medienunternehmen mbH v Google LLC (C-299/17); EN.SA. Srl v Agenzia delle Entrate – Direzione Regionale Lombardia Ufficio Contenzioso (C-712/17); PORR Építési Kft. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága (C-691/17); Human Operator Zrt. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága (C-434/17)
Cites 20: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016); Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax; Stichting Natuur en Milieu and Others v College van Gedeputeerde Staten van Groningen and College van Gedeputeerde Staten van Zuid-Holland (C-166/09 and C-167/09) (C-165/09, C-166/09, C-167/09); Ministero dell'Industria, del Commercio e dell'Artigianato v Lucchini SpA (C-119/05); Criminal proceedings against Giuseppe Astone (C-332/15); Abbey National plc v Commissioners of Customs & Excise (C-408/98); Pannon Gép Centrum Kft v APEH Központi Hivatal Hatósági Főosztály Dél-dunántúli Kihelyezett Hatósági Osztály (C-368/09); Ecotrade SpA v Agenzia delle Entrate - Ufficio di Genova 3 (C-95/07); Reemtsma Cigarettenfabriken GmbH v Ministero delle Finanze (C-35/05); Shirley Preston and Othes v Wolverhampton Healthcare NHS Trust and Others and Dorothy Fletcher and Others v Midland Bank plc (C-78/98); Council Directive 2010/45/EU of 13 July 2010 amending Directive 2006/112/EC on the common system of value added tax as regards the rules on invoicing; SC Fatorie SRL v Direcţia Generală a Finanţelor Publice Bihor (C-424/12)2 provisions; Teritorialna direktsia na Natsionalnata agentsia za prihodite — Plovdiv v Rodopi-M 91 OOD (C-259/12); J. van der Weerd and Others, H. de Rooy sr. and H. de Rooy jr., Maatschap H. en J. van ’t Oever and Others and B. J. van Middendorp v Minister van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit (C-222/05, C-223/05, C-224/05, C-225/05); Promociones y Construcciones BJ 200 SL (C-125/12); Abdelhafid Bensada Benallal v État belge (C-161/15); Ministerstvo práce a sociálních věcí v B (C-394/13); Tibor Farkas v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Dél-alfödi Regionális Adó Főigazgatósága (C-564/15); José Teodoro de Andrade v Director da Alfândega de Leixões, intervener: Ministério Público (C-213/99); Jeroen van Schijndel and Johannes Nicolaas Cornelis van Veen v Stichting Pensioenfonds voor Fysiotherapeuten (C-430/93, C-431/93)