Luxemburg, 07/06/2007 (Agence Europe) - Following the deposition of eight complaints, in 1999, the Commission accused Greece of failing to properly transpose the directive on the temporary import of motor cars, and of tolerating serious barriers to the free movement of Community residents in this member state. After considering each accusation individually, the Court has delivered a mixed ruling.
As an introduction, the Court points out that a previous case (Louloudakis, C 262/99, see EUROPE 8005) had already demonstrated in principle the correct transposition of Council directive 83/182/EEC. In view of the sanctions, the Court noted that it was permissible for a member state to take measures to protect its tax interests and that, in the case of Greece, there was good reason to ensure that drivers did not succumb to the temptation of setting up a fictitious address in another country in order to illegally avoid the very high registration taxes in Greece. It had to be ensured, however, that measures were proportionate - something the Court had been unable to do in this case. As for monetary sanctions for exceeding the duty-free period, the Court judged that the six months allowed was a sufficiently long period and that the sanctions were proportionate. The Court also confirmed member states' regulatory power to decide whether the owner of a vehicle which is stolen during the duty-free period should pay the registration taxes (as is the case under Greek law). The relevant directive does not deal with cases where the vehicle is outside the control of the beneficiary of the duty-free status but still in the country. However, the procedure which allows people to give up the right of remedy at law in exchange for a guarantee that they will not be prosecuted was deemed not to comply with Community law on access to justice, and the distraint of the cars was, the Court said, an obstacle to free movement, disproportionate with regard to its aim.
At the time of going to press, the ruling was still being considered by the Greek authorities, according to the permanent representation to the EU, but it may be supposed that there will be some revision of national legislation to come into line with the two points where the Court felt obligations had not been met. (cd)