The Joustra case
Some 70 private individuals formed a wine club in the Netherlands. On behalf of this club, Mr Joustra orders wine in France for his own use and that of the other member of the club. The wine is transported to the Netherlands by a Dutch transport company and delivered to his home. Mr Joustra pays for the wine and transport and each member of the group reimburses him. Mr Joustra does not make any profit of this activity.
According to the Directive 92/12/ECC, only products acquired and transported personally by private individuals are exempt from excise duty (a tax on consumer goods, that is not for trade). Nonetheless, the Netherlands authorities decided to levy excise duty on that wine arguing that the wine was transported by a private transport company. Mr Joustra challenged the Netherlands decision.
The directive states that excise duty is in general chargeable in the EU country of final destination. However, it makes an exception for products "acquired by private individuals for their own use and transported by them" - in this case excise duty is charged in the member state where the goods were acquired.
The directive refers to alcohol, alcoholic beverages, manufactured tobacco and mineral oils (such as petrol or diesel) for private use.
The public health implications of the judgement
In this key judgement, the Court rules that the exception for products acquired by private individuals is not valid when the goods are delivered to their home country by a private company.
This judgement implies that citizens purchasing alcohol or tobacco over internet have to pay the taxes in their own country, even if those taxes are higher that in the country where it has been purchased.
If it had turned out to be be legal, many more people would have ordered alcohol and tobacco from abroad. This could have endangered national policies using taxes as a public health tool. In addition, evidence shows that taxes are among the most cost-effective instruments to tackle alcohol related harm.
The ECJ procedure
The preliminary ruling procedure is followed when a national court is in any doubt about the interpretation or validity of an EU law.
A preliminary ruling binds the national court that requested the judgment as well as all bodies, which may have to decide the same case on appeal. Although the decision is binding, the court may request a second preliminary ruling in the same case.
EPHA related sections
