Council Directive (EU) 2018/822 and the Right to Privacy. An Attempt to Answer the Preliminary Question in Case C-694/20

• Authors: Adam Szymacha

Abstracts

EN

Through an action before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), the Belgian Constitutional Court intends to obtain an answer to the question related to the compatibility of Council Directive (EU) 2018/822 with the fundamental right to respect for private life. The mechanism provided by this Directive may violate this right because it consists in obliging the lawyer who has invoked the Legal Professional Privilege to provide information about the evasion of the obligation to inform the authorities about the cross-border arrangement. This arrangement may amount to tax avoidance by the client. I will try to predict the possible response of the CJEU by analyzing its previous case law. Interference with fundamental rights must be proportionate. The secrecy of the lawyer’s communication with his client deserves special protection. The proportionality of the interference may be evidenced by filters such as judicial supervision, intermediation by an independent authority etc.

Keywords

EN

right to respect for private life; tax avoidance; human rights; cross-border agreements

• Publisher: Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
• Journal: Adam Mickiewicz University Law Review
• Year: 2022
• Volume: 14
• Pages: 209-230

Dates

published

2022

Contributors

author

Adam Szymacha

• University of Lodz, Doctoral School of Social Sciences, Lodz, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000000293729647

References

• Garlicki, Leszek. “Komentarz do art. 8.” In Konwencja o ochronie Praw Człowieka i Podstawowych Wolności, vol. 1, Komentarz do artykułów 1–18, edited by Leszek Garlicki. Warszawa, 2010: 479–550.
• Górski, Marcin. “Karta Praw Podstawowych UE jako living instrument.” In Unia Europejska w przededniu Brexitu, edited by Jacek Barcik, and Magdalena Półtorak, Warszawa, 2018: 9191–1000.
• Jaskiernia, Jerzy. “Karta Praw Podstawowych Unii Europejskiej a Europejska Konwencja o Ochronie Praw Człowieka i Podstawowych Wolności – konflikt czy komplementarność.” In Karta Praw Podstawowych w europejskim i krajowym porządku prawnym, edited by Andrzej Wróbel. Warszawa, 2009: 153–190
• Maliszewska-Nienartowicz, Justyna. “Rozwój zasady proporcjonalności w europejskim prawie wspólnotowym.” Studia Europejskie/Centrum Europejskie Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, no. 1. 2006: 59–80.
• Maśnicki, Jędrzej. “Metody transpozycji dyrektyw.” Europejski Przegląd Sądowy, no. 8. 2017: 4–13.
• Matusiak-Frącczak, Magdalena. Tajemnica adwokacka a obowiązek informowania o transakcjach podejrzanych na podstawie przepisów o przeciwdzia-łaniu praniu pieniędzy i finansowaniu terroryzmu. Glosa do wyroku ETPC z dnia 6 grudnia 2012 r. LEX/el., 2013, access: 24.02.2022.
• Ploszka, Adam. “Tajemnica zawodowa prawników a przeciwdziałanie praniu pieniędzy w kontekście dialogu trybunałów europejskich.” In Wpływ Europejskiej Konwencji Praw Człowieka na funkcjonowanie biznesu, edited by Adam Bodnar, and Adam Ploszka. Warszawa, 2016: 113 - 132.
• Sobczak, Jacek. “Komentarz do art. 8.” In Karta Praw Podstawowych Unii Europejskiej. Komentarz, edited by Andrzej Wróbel. Warszawa, 2013: 192–690.
• Vedsted-Hansen, Jens. “A Commentary to Article 7.” In The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. A Commentary, edited by Steve Peers, Tamara Hervey, Jeff Kenner, and Angela Ward. Oxford, 2014: 153–182.
• Wyrozumska, Anna. “Zasady działania UE.” In Instytucje i prawo Unii Europejskiej. Podręcznik dla kierunków prawa, zarządzania i administracji, edited by Jan Barcz, Maciej Górka, and Anna Wyrozumska. Warszawa, 2015: 76–112.
• Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, OJ. EU C 326/391.
• Council Directive (EU) 2018/822 of 25 May 2018 amending Directive 2011/16/EU as regards mandatory automatic exchange of information in the field of taxation in relation to reportable cross-border arrangements OJ. EU L 139/1.
• Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, amending Regulation (EU) No. 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC OJ. UE L 141/73.
• European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as amended by Protocols Nos. 11 and 14, Rome 4 November 1950.
• Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union OJ.EU. C 326 of 26.10.2012.
• The association for European Integration and Human Rights and Ekimdzhiev v. Bulgaria, Application No. 62540/00.
• Asociación Nacional de Establecimientos Financieros de Crédito (ASNEF), Federación de Comercio Electrónico y Marketing Directo (FECEMD) v. Administración del Estado, joined cases C-468/10 and C-469/10.
• Commission v. Pilkington Group Ltd, case C-278/13, ECLI:EU:C:2013:558.
• Fromançais SA v. Fonds d’orientation et de régularisation des marchés agricoles (FORMA), case C-66/82, ECLI:EU:C:1983:42.
• Gillan and Quinton v. UK, Application No. 4158/05.
• Heinz Hubner v. Bundesrepublik Deutschland, case C-524/06.
• Klass and others v. Germany, Application No. 5029/71.
• Malone v. UK, Application No. 8691/79.
• Michaud v. France, Application No. 12323/11.
• Narinen v. Finland, Application No. 45027/98.
• Nexans France SAS and Nexans SA v. Commision, case T-135/09, ECLI:EU:T:2012:596.
• Niemietz v. Germany, Application No. 13710/88.
• Ordre des barreaux francophones et germanophone v. Conseil des ministers, case C-305/05, Opinion of the Advocate General, ECLI:EU:C:2006:788.
• Orde van Vlaamse Balies and Others, case C-694/20, summary of the request for a preliminary ruling.
• Pharmacie populaire – La Sauvegarde SCRL v. État belge, joined cases C-52/21 and C-53/21, ECLI:EU:C:2022:127.
• Roquette Frères SA v. Directeur général de la concurrence, de la consommation et de la répression des fraude, case C-94/00, ECLI:EU:C:2002:603.
• Rotaru v. Romania, Application No. 28341/95.
• Sallinen and others v. Finland, Application No. 50882/99.
• Segerstedt-Wiberg v. Sweden, Application No. 623332/00.
• Société Colas Est v. France, Application No. 37971/97.
• Weber and Saravia v. Germany, Application No. 54934/00.

Identifiers

DOI

10.14746/ppuam.2022.14.10

Biblioteka Nauki

28677039