Reference no.:
Official Gazette RS, No. 112/2006 and OdlUS XV, 74 | 19.10.2006
As the petitioner's proceedings in which she has requested the refund of the difference between the charged excise duty and the reduced excise duty have not yet been finally concluded, the conditions determined in Article 47 of the Constitutional Court Act for the review of the challenged Article 30 of the Excise Duty Act are fulfilled. The legislature regulated two positions differently, which are equal in terms of their essential characteristics, by regulating that a person subject to pay an excise duty must in the event the excise duty is increased pay the difference between the increased excise duty, and in the event the excise duty is reduced he/she is not entitled to request the refund of the difference. The Government in its opinion stated that such regulation was introduced in order to prevent the accumulation of stocks of excisable goods outside of tax warehouses directly before the increase in the excise duty level, and in order to prevent the avoidance of duties payment, speculation, and abuse, as well as to decrease the reduction of such payments into the budget. However, in the view of the Constitutional Court this is not a sound reason for a differentiation arising from the nature of the matter which is the subject of the regulation. Even if in the challenged regulation the legislature followed the aforementioned goal in cases involving an increase in the excise duty, such goal would have been achieved by means of a regulation according to which a person subject to pay an excise duty in cases involving a decrease in the excise duty for goods in stock outside of tax warehouses could have requested a refund of the difference. As the legislature did not demonstrate a sound reason arising from the nature of the matter for enacting a regulation on the basis of which positions that are essentially equal are regulated differently, the challenged provision is inconsistent with paragraph 2 of Article 14 of the Constitution.
Document in PDF:
Type of procedure:
review of constitutionality and legality of regulations and other general acts
Type of act:
Družba Petrol, d. d., Ljubljana
Date of application:
Date of decision:
Type of decision adopted:
Outcome of proceedings:
establishment – it is inconsistent with the Constitution/statute