30. un 110. panta nošķiršana Līgumā par Eiropas Savienības darbību
Date
2016
Authors
Jonins, Emīls
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Latvijas Universitāte
Abstract
Autors savā pētījumā „30. un 110. panta nošķiršana Līgumā par Eiropas Savienības darbību” veicis pētījumu par LESD 30. un LESD 110. panta piemērošanu un to savstarpēju nošķiršanu. Šī pētījuma mērķis bija analizēt LESD 30. un LESD 110. panta saturu un piemērošanu, kā arī noteikt konkrētus kritērijus, lai veiktu precīzu minēto pantu nošķiršanu. Pētījuma ietvaros autors izpētījis LESD 30. un LESD 110. panta vēsturisko attīstību. Apskatījis LESD 30. un LESD 110. panta piemērošanas raksturīgākos gadījumus, kā arī noteicis kritērijus pantu savstarpējai nošķiršanai. Autors galvenokārt izmantojis literatūru angļu valodā, analizējis Eiropas Savienības tiesas praksi, iepazinies ar tiesību zinātnieku viedokļiem, kā arī apskatījis uz pētījumu attiecināmo Eiropas Savienības tiesību aktu pieņemšanas vēsturi. Pētījuma rezultātā autors noteicis, ka LESD 30. un LESD 110. panta nošķiršanu iespējams veikt balstoties uz trim kritērijiem: (1)preču izcelsme, (2)maksājuma piemērošanas pamats, (3) maksājuma piemērošanas veids.
In his research „Distinction between article 30 and article 110 in Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union” the author has reviewed application and separation between article 30 TFEU and article 110 TFEU. The aim of this research was to analyze content and application of article 30 TFEU and article 110 TFEU and to define criteria for achieving precise separation between previously mentioned articles. In the current research the author has analyzed the historical development of article 30 TFEU and article 110 TFEU. The author has also reviewed most characteristic cases where article 30 TFEU and article 110 TFEU have been applyed as well the author has defined criteria for sepereting them. The author has mainly used literature in English, analyzed the practice of European Union Court of Justice, read the different views of legal experts as well reviewed the history of adoption of the topic relevant normative acts of the European Union. The author has concluded that separation between article 30 TFEU and article 110 TFEU can be done by basis of three criteria: (1)the origin of goods, (2)reason of application, (3)mode of application.
In his research „Distinction between article 30 and article 110 in Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union” the author has reviewed application and separation between article 30 TFEU and article 110 TFEU. The aim of this research was to analyze content and application of article 30 TFEU and article 110 TFEU and to define criteria for achieving precise separation between previously mentioned articles. In the current research the author has analyzed the historical development of article 30 TFEU and article 110 TFEU. The author has also reviewed most characteristic cases where article 30 TFEU and article 110 TFEU have been applyed as well the author has defined criteria for sepereting them. The author has mainly used literature in English, analyzed the practice of European Union Court of Justice, read the different views of legal experts as well reviewed the history of adoption of the topic relevant normative acts of the European Union. The author has concluded that separation between article 30 TFEU and article 110 TFEU can be done by basis of three criteria: (1)the origin of goods, (2)reason of application, (3)mode of application.
Description
Keywords
Juridiskā zinātne , Eiropas Savienība , Brīva preču aprite , Muitas nodokļi , Maksājums ar muitas nodokļiem līdzvērtīgu iedarbību , Diskriminējoši nodokļi