Case C-75/18 Vodafone Magyarország [Archived]

Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
Published by a LexisNexis Competition expert
Practice notes

Case C-75/18 Vodafone Magyarország [Archived]

Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis

Published by a LexisNexis Competition expert

Practice notes
imgtext

CASE HUB

ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 3 March 2020; it is no longer maintained.

See further, timeline and related/relevant cases.

Case facts

OutlineCase C- 75/18 Vodafone Magyarország—a national reference from Hungary seeking clarification as to whether (amongst other tax related issues) the progressive taxation of economically strong undertakings constitutes unlawful State aid in favour of weaker undertakings
Latest developmentsOn 21 January 2020, the Court of Justice issued its judgment.
Parties• Vodafone Magyarország Mobil Távközlési Zrt. (Vodafone). Vodafone is a public limited company based in Hungary. The sole shareholder of Vodafone is Vodafone Europe BV, a company registered in the Netherlands.
MarketTelecommunications.
Background to referenceThe present matter arose following a tax inspection of Vodafone for the period between 1 April 2011 and 31 March 2015. After carrying out this inspection, the Finanzverwaltung (the Hungarian tax authority) highlighted a tax discrepancy of HUF 8.371m to be paid by Vodafone and, as a result, additional tax surcharges and fines. Since an appeal against the above
Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
Key definition:
COL definition
What does COL mean?

Combined Construction and Operating licence: part of the US regulatory environment relating to new nuclear build.

Read more readmore

Popular documents

Case C- 67/13 Groupement des Cartes Bancaires (CB) v Commission ('by object' restrictions) [Archived]

Case C- 67/13 Groupement des Cartes Bancaires (CB) v Commission ('by object' restrictions) [Archived]CASE HUBARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 11 September 2014; it is no longer maintained. See further: timeline, commentary and related/relevant

Case C- 680/21 Royal Antwerp Football Club [Archived]

Case C- 680/21 Royal Antwerp Football Club [Archived]CASE HUBARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 21 December 2023; it is no longer maintained.See further, timeline.Case factsOutlineA national reference from Belgium seeking clarification on the

Case C- 413/14 Intel v Commission (rebates and loyalty payments)

Case C- 413/14 Intel v Commission (rebates and loyalty payments)CASE HUB (date of judgment—06/09/2017)Note—referred back to the General Court in Case T- 286/09 RENVSee further: timeline, commentary and related/relevant casesCase factsARCHIVE—06/09/2017OutlineAppeal brought against the judgment of

Case T- 136/19 Bulgarian Energy Holding and Others v Commission [Archived]

Case T- 136/19 Bulgarian Energy Holding and Others v Commission [Archived]CASE HUBNOTE—appeal lodged before the Court of Justice in Case C- 14/24ARCHIVED—this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the judgment of 25 October 2023; it is no longer maintained.See further, timeline.Case