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
EQ v Administration de l'Enregistrement, des Domaines et de la TVA (C-846/19)
Consideration of the questions referred
The first to fourth questions
31

EQ v Administration de l'Enregistrement, des Domaines et de la TVA (C-846/19)

Judgment of 15 Apr 2021law://eu/cjeu/2019/c-846-19/para_31@2026-11-12

31It should be observed that although the VAT Directive gives a very wide scope to VAT, only activities of an economic nature are covered by that tax (judgment of 17 December 2020, WEG Tevesstraße, C‑449/19, EU:C:2020:1038, paragraph 24 and the case-law cited).

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

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Third Chamber
Case: C-846/19 · ECLI:EU:C:2021:277
Decided: 15 Apr 2021
Procedure: Preliminary reference · referred by the tribunal d’arrondissement (District Court, Luxembourg)
Applicant: EQ
Defendant: Administration de l’Enregistrement, des Domaines et de la TVA
Rapporteur: A. Prechal
Advocate General: G. Pitruzzella
Bench: 5 judges
A. Prechal, N. Wahl, F. Biltgen, L.S. Rossi, J. Passer
Language: French
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62019CJ0846

Topics

Value added tax

History · 1 version

15 Apr 2021Reading

Connections

Interprets 1: Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax
Cited by 15: ET, acting as liquidator of Air Berlin PLC & Co. Luftverkehrs KG (AB KG) v Bundesrepublik Deutschland (C-165/20); Slagelse Almennyttige Boligselskab Afdeling Schackenborgvænge and Others v MV and Others (C-417/23); Határ Diszkont Kft. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága (C-427/23); Belgische Staat/Federale Overheidsdienst Financiën v L BV (C-243/23); Centrul Român pentru Administrarea Drepturilor Artiștilor Interpreți (Credidam) v Guvernul României and Ministerul Finanțelor (C-179/23)2 provisions; TP v Administration de l'enregistrement, des domaines et de la TVA (C-288/22); Gemeinde A v Finanzamt (C-344/22); MOMTRADE RUSE LTD v Direktor na Direktsia 'Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika' Varna pri Tsentralno upravlenie na Natsionalnata agentsia za prihodite (C-620/21); Fluvius Antwerpen v MX (C-677/21); Gmina O. v Dyrektor Krajowej Informacji Skarbowej (C-612/21); Dyrektor Krajowej Informacji Skarbowej v Gmina L (C-616/21); A v Finanzamt X (C-713/21); I GmbH v Finanzamt H (C-228/20); Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira v Termas Sulfurosas de Alcafache SA (C-513/20); Amper Metal Kft v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága (C-334/20)
Cites 22: Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax; FRANCK d.d., Zagreb v Ministarstvo financija Republike Hrvatske, Samostalni sektor za drugostupanjski upravni postupak (C-801/19); Ambulanter Pflegedienst Kügler GmbH v Finanzamt für Körperschaften I in Berlin (C-141/00); Idealmed III – Serviços de Saúde SA v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira (C-211/18); Lajvér Meliorációs Nonprofit Kft. and Lajvér Csapadékvízrendezési Nonprofit Kft. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Dél-dunántúli Regionális Adó Főigazgatósága (NAV) (C-263/15); Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Finland (C-246/08); Gemeente Borsele v Staatssecretaris van Financiën and Staatssecretaris van Financiën v Gemeente Borsele (C-520/14); WEG Tevesstraße v Finanzamt Villingen-Schwenningen (C-449/19)2 provisions; Ordre des barreaux francophones et germanophone and Others v Conseil des ministres (C-543/14); Corina-Hrisi Tulică v Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală — Direcţia Generală de Soluţionare a Contestaţiilor and Călin Ion Plavoşin v Direcţia Generală a Finanţelor Publice Timiş — Serviciul Soluţionare Contestaţii and Activitatea de Inspecţie Fiscală — Serviciul de Inspecţie Fiscală Timiş (C-249/12, C-250/12); Le Rayon d’Or SARL v Ministre de l’Économie et des Finances (C-151/13); Saudaçor – Sociedade Gestora de Recursos e Equipamentos da Saúde dos Açores SA v Fazenda Pública (C-174/14); Nagyszénás Településszolgáltatási Nonprofit Kft. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága (C-182/17); Finanzamt Steglitz v Ines Zimmermann (C-174/11); Kingscrest Associates Ltd and Montecello Ltd v Commissioners of Customs & Excise (C-498/03); Les Jardins de Jouvence SCRL v État belge (C-335/14); Finanzamt D v E (C-657/19); Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs v Brockenhurst College (C-699/15); Renate Enkler v Finanzamt Homburg (C-230/94); European Commission v French Republic (C-492/08); 'go fair' Zeitarbeit OHG v Finanzamt Hamburg-Altona (C-594/13); Jennifer Gregg and Mervyn Gregg v Commissioners of Customs and Excise (C-216/97)