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
Ferimet SL v Administración General del Estado (C-281/20)
Consideration of the questions referred
36

Ferimet SL v Administración General del Estado (C-281/20)

Judgment of 11 Nov 2021law://eu/cjeu/2020/c-281-20/para_36@2026-11-12

36The position may, however, be different if non-compliance with formal requirements effectively prevents the production of conclusive evidence that the substantive requirements have been satisfied (judgment of 19 October 2017, Paper Consult, C‑101/16, EU:C:2017:775, paragraph 42 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 · Fifth Chamber
Case: C-281/20 · ECLI:EU:C:2021:910
Decided: 11 Nov 2021
Procedure: Preliminary reference · referred by the Tribunal Supremo (Supreme Court, Spain)
Applicant: Ferimet SL
Defendant: Administracíon General del Estado
Rapporteur: I. Jarukaitis
Advocate General: P. Pikamäe
Bench: 5 judges
E. Regan, K. Lenaerts, C. Lycourgos, I. Jarukaitis, M. Ilešič
Language: Spanish
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62020CJ0281

Topics

Value added tax

History · 1 version

11 Nov 2021Reading

Connections

Interprets 1: Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax
Cited by 9: S.C. Arcomet Towercranes S.R.L. v Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Bucureşti and Administraţia Fiscală pentru Contribuabili Mijlocii Bucureşti (C-726/23); Feudi di San Gregorio Aziende Agricole SpA v Agenzia delle Entrate (C-341/22); Global Ink Trade Kft. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága (C-537/22); Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej w Warszawie v W. Sp. z o.o (C-114/22); Aquila Part Prod Com S.A v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága (C-512/21); A v Finanzamt M (C-596/21); UAB 'HA.EN.' v Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija (C-227/21); SC Cridar Cons SRL v Administraţia Judeţeană a Finanţelor Publice Cluj and Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Cluj-Napoca (C-582/20); Kemwater ProChemie s. r. o. v Odvolací finanční ředitelství (C-154/20)2 provisions
Cites 22: Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax; Tibor Farkas v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Dél-alfödi Regionális Adó Főigazgatósága (C-564/15); WebMindLicenses kft v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Kiemelt Adó- és Vám Főigazgatóság (C-419/14); Glencore Agriculture Hungary Kft. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága (C-189/18); Lucreţiu Hadrian Vădan v Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală – Direcţia Generală de Soluţionare a Contestaţiilor and Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Braşov - Administraţia Judeţeană a Finanţelor Publice Alba (C-664/16); SC Paper Consult SRL v Direcţia Regională a Finanţelor Publice Cluj-Napoca and Administraţia Judeţeană a Finanţelor Publice Bistriţa Năsăud (C-101/16)2 provisions; Barlis 06 – Investimentos Imobiliários e Turísticos SA v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira (C-516/14); Ecotrade SpA v Agenzia delle Entrate - Ufficio di Genova 3 (C-95/07); SIA „Kuršu zeme' v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests (C-273/18); Vikingo Fővállalkozó Kft. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága (C-610/19); Crewprint Kft. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága (C-611/19); SC Fatorie SRL v Direcţia Generală a Finanţelor Publice Bihor (C-424/12); Mahagében Kft v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Dél-dunántúli Regionális Adó Főigazgatósága and Péter Dávid v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Észak-alföldi Regionális Adó Főigazgatósága (C-80/11, C-142/11); Axel Kittel v Belgian State and Belgian State v Recolta Recycling SPRL (C-439/04, C-440/04); HR v Finanzamt Wilmersdorf (C-108/20); PPUH Stehcemp sp. j Florian Stefanek, Janina Stefanek, Jaroslaw Stefanek v Dyrektor Izby Skarbowej w Łodzi (C-277/14); KrakVet Marek Batko sp. K. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága (C-276/18); Maks Pen EOOD v Direktor na Direktsia ‘Obzhalvane i danachno-osiguritelna praktika’ Sofia (C-18/13); Gábor Tóth v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Észak-magyarországi Regionális Adó Főigazgatósága (C-324/11); Finanzamt Gummersbach v Gerhard Bockemühl (C-90/02); Signum Alfa Sped Kft. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Kiemelt Adó- és Vám Főigazgatóság (C-446/15); Senatex GmbH v Finanzamt Hannover-Nord (C-518/14)