非法获取的证据:如果你愿意,请跟随欧盟法院

Pub Date : 2021-12-01 DOI:10.54648/ecta2021027
Mirugia Richardson
{"title":"非法获取的证据:如果你愿意,请跟随欧盟法院","authors":"Mirugia Richardson","doi":"10.54648/ecta2021027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This contribution addresses the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the issue of the use of unlawfully obtained evidence by the tax authorities in an administrative procedure. In 2015 in the value added tax (VAT) case WebMindLicences the CJEU has set the conditions for excluding evidence in an administrative procedure if that evidence was obtained or used in violation of the law. The highest courts of the neighbouring European Union (EU) Member States Belgium and the Netherlands had already developed in their case-law before the CJEU’s judgment in WebMindlicenses their own legal standard on the exclusion of unlawfully obtained evidence in tax cases. The author contributes to the discussion on whether national courts can maintain their own viewpoint or have to conform to the CJEU’s legal standard for excluding evidence in administrative procedures concerning tax, for the harmonized VAT as well as for the non-harmonized taxes.\nunlawfully obtained evidence, VAT fraud, fundamental rights, rights of the defence","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Unlawfully Obtained Evidence: Follow the Court of Justice of the European Union if You Please\",\"authors\":\"Mirugia Richardson\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/ecta2021027\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This contribution addresses the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the issue of the use of unlawfully obtained evidence by the tax authorities in an administrative procedure. In 2015 in the value added tax (VAT) case WebMindLicences the CJEU has set the conditions for excluding evidence in an administrative procedure if that evidence was obtained or used in violation of the law. The highest courts of the neighbouring European Union (EU) Member States Belgium and the Netherlands had already developed in their case-law before the CJEU’s judgment in WebMindlicenses their own legal standard on the exclusion of unlawfully obtained evidence in tax cases. The author contributes to the discussion on whether national courts can maintain their own viewpoint or have to conform to the CJEU’s legal standard for excluding evidence in administrative procedures concerning tax, for the harmonized VAT as well as for the non-harmonized taxes.\\nunlawfully obtained evidence, VAT fraud, fundamental rights, rights of the defence\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/ecta2021027\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/ecta2021027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这一贡献涉及欧洲联盟法院关于税务机关在行政程序中使用非法获得的证据问题的判例法。2015年,在增值税(VAT)案件WebMindLicenses中,欧盟法院设定了在行政程序中排除证据的条件,如果该证据是违法获得或使用的。在欧盟法院对WebMind作出判决之前,邻国欧盟成员国比利时和荷兰的最高法院已经在其判例法中制定了自己的法律标准,即在税务案件中排除非法获取的证据。提交人参与了关于国家法院是否可以保持自己的观点或必须遵守欧盟法院关于在税务行政程序中排除证据、统一增值税和非统一税收的法律标准的讨论。非法获取的证据、增值税欺诈、基本权利、辩护权
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享
查看原文
Unlawfully Obtained Evidence: Follow the Court of Justice of the European Union if You Please
This contribution addresses the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the issue of the use of unlawfully obtained evidence by the tax authorities in an administrative procedure. In 2015 in the value added tax (VAT) case WebMindLicences the CJEU has set the conditions for excluding evidence in an administrative procedure if that evidence was obtained or used in violation of the law. The highest courts of the neighbouring European Union (EU) Member States Belgium and the Netherlands had already developed in their case-law before the CJEU’s judgment in WebMindlicenses their own legal standard on the exclusion of unlawfully obtained evidence in tax cases. The author contributes to the discussion on whether national courts can maintain their own viewpoint or have to conform to the CJEU’s legal standard for excluding evidence in administrative procedures concerning tax, for the harmonized VAT as well as for the non-harmonized taxes. unlawfully obtained evidence, VAT fraud, fundamental rights, rights of the defence
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信