The End Does Not Justify the Means: On How the Secondary EU Law Infringes the Primary EU Law in the Light of the Recent Judgments of the CJEU*
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
The End Does Not Justify the Means : On How the Secondary EU Law Infringes the Primary EU Law in the Light of the Recent Judgments of the CJEU*. / Papis-Almansa, Marta.
In: Intertax, Vol. 51, No. 8-9, 2023, p. 612-629.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - The End Does Not Justify the Means
T2 - On How the Secondary EU Law Infringes the Primary EU Law in the Light of the Recent Judgments of the CJEU*
AU - Papis-Almansa, Marta
N1 - Funding Information: This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No 101028296. Publisher Copyright: © 2023 Kluwer Law International BV, The Netherlands
PY - 2023
Y1 - 2023
N2 - The constitutional character of the Union legal order based on the rule of law requires that secondary sources of Union law are not infringing the primary sources, including the Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CFR). The latter’s importance as a valid instrument to be invoked against measures that are excessive in their interference with the fundamental rights has recently been reinforced by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the judgments in cases such as C-694/20, Orde van Vlaamse Balies and Others, and joined cases C-37/20 and C-601/20, Luxembourg Business Registers and Sovim. The CJEU invalidated provisions of the Directive on Administrative Cooperation (DAC6) and 5AMLD which reminded that this is the case even when rules are motivated by important collective interests. These include the combat against tax evasion and tax fraud and enhancing broadly understood transparency and are agreed upon and are ‘validated’ by a Union’s legislature. The lessons to be learned are not to be underestimated. Understanding where the limits lie is decisive for valid law making and law enforcement as well as for effectively invoking the rights of individuals and businesses.
AB - The constitutional character of the Union legal order based on the rule of law requires that secondary sources of Union law are not infringing the primary sources, including the Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CFR). The latter’s importance as a valid instrument to be invoked against measures that are excessive in their interference with the fundamental rights has recently been reinforced by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the judgments in cases such as C-694/20, Orde van Vlaamse Balies and Others, and joined cases C-37/20 and C-601/20, Luxembourg Business Registers and Sovim. The CJEU invalidated provisions of the Directive on Administrative Cooperation (DAC6) and 5AMLD which reminded that this is the case even when rules are motivated by important collective interests. These include the combat against tax evasion and tax fraud and enhancing broadly understood transparency and are agreed upon and are ‘validated’ by a Union’s legislature. The lessons to be learned are not to be underestimated. Understanding where the limits lie is decisive for valid law making and law enforcement as well as for effectively invoking the rights of individuals and businesses.
KW - AMLD
KW - Charter of the Fundamental Rights
KW - compatibility with primary Union law
KW - DAC6
KW - EU constitutional order
KW - proportionality
KW - right to fair trial
KW - right to privacy
KW - taxpayers’ rights
KW - transparency
U2 - 10.54648/taxi2023055
DO - 10.54648/taxi2023055
M3 - Journal article
AN - SCOPUS:85170715484
VL - 51
SP - 612
EP - 629
JO - Intertax
JF - Intertax
SN - 0165-2826
IS - 8-9
ER -
ID: 374863671