Court of Justice 13 September 2005, C-220/03 (European Central Bank v Federal Republic of Germany.)

Also known as

Advocate General Stix-Hackl opined that the Court of Justice lacks jurisdiction to interpret Article 3 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities in a direct action brought by the European Central Bank (ECB) against the Federal Republic of Germany, as neither the general Treaty procedures nor the arbitration clause in Article 21 of the ECB Headquarters Agreement extend to binding interpretation of that Protocol. The Court's jurisdiction is limited to disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the Headquarters Agreement itself, under which Article 8(1) exhaustively and specifically defines the conditions for refund of turnover tax (Umsatzsteuer), requiring that such tax be separately invoiced—a condition undisputedly not met in the present case. Accordingly, the Advocate General proposed that the action be dismissed in its entirety and that the ECB be ordered to pay costs.AI