Exchange Of Information And EU Fundamental Rights (C-682/15 ...

• • Login
  • EN [EN] English [FR] Français
• Give us feedback
• Search and exploreSearchExplore ORBilu
• Open ScienceOpen ScienceOpen AccessResearch Data ManagementDefinitionsOS Working groupWebinars
• Statistics
• HelpUser GuideFAQPublication listDocument typesReportingTraining ORCID
• AboutAbout ORBiluDeposit MandateORBilu teamImpact and visibilityAbout statisticsAbout metricsOAI-PMHProject historyLegal InformationData protectionLegal notices

Back

1. Home
2. Detailed Reference

Request a copy Contribution to collective works (Parts of books)Luxembourg: Exchange of Information and EU Fundamental Rights (C-682/15, Berlioz Investment Fund S.A.)HASLEHNER, Werner2017 • In Lang, Michael; Pistone, Pasquale; Rust, Alexander et al. (Eds.) CJEU – Recent Developments in Direct Taxation 2016 Peer reviewedPermalinkhttps://hdl.handle.net/10993/31993 Files (1)Send toDetailsStatisticsBibliographySimilar publications

Files

Full Text

Berlioz Comment - CJEU Cases 2016.pdfPublisher postprint (3.22 MB)Request a copy

All documents in ORBilu are protected by a user license.

Send to

RISBibTexAPAChicagoPermalinkXLinkedin copy to clipboard copied

Details

Keywords :Exchange of Information; Fundamental Rights; Effective Remedy; Foreseeable relevance Abstract :[en] The present case concerns the question of whether the right to an effective remedy — as guaranteed in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — means that a Member State must allow a company to challenge an order requesting information for the purposes of the tax assessment of another party in a court that would have unlimited authority to review the legitimacy of that order, including the “foreseeable relevance” of the original request made by another Member State. The case has the potential to provide a crucial piece in the legal puzzle that surrounds exchange of information in tax matters in the triangle of domestic law, tax treaty law and EU law, with particular emphasis on the protection of taxpayer (and related party) rights. However, due to the actual circumstances of the case, it does not appear likely that the CJEU will address all of the questions asked by Luxembourg’s Cour administrative. In particular, the meaning of “foreseeable relevance” under Directive 2011/16 may be seen as having little relevance for the outcome of the case in light of the broad meaning given to it by Luxembourg’s statute so that the CJEU may leave it unresolved even if it agrees with the domestic court on the application of Article 47 of the Charter. Disciplines :European & international lawTax law Author, co-author :HASLEHNER, Werner ; University of Luxembourg > Faculty of Law, Economics and Finance (FDEF) > Law Research Unit External co-authors :no Language :English Title :Luxembourg: Exchange of Information and EU Fundamental Rights (C-682/15, Berlioz Investment Fund S.A.) Publication date :2017 Main work title :CJEU – Recent Developments in Direct Taxation 2016 Editor :Lang, MichaelPistone, PasqualeRust, AlexanderSchuch, JosefStaringer, ClausStorck, Alfred Publisher :Linde Verlag, Vienna, Austria ISBN/EAN :978-3-7073-3697-9 Collection name :Series on International Tax Law Vol. 103 Pages :97-116 Peer reviewed :Peer reviewed Focus Area :Law / European Law Available on ORBilu :since 29 August 2017

Statistics

Number of views380 (17 by Unilu)Number of downloads22 (6 by Unilu)More statistics

Bibliography

Similar publications

Contact ORBilu