C-76/87

OPINION OF MR MISCHO —JOINED CASES 76, 86 TO 89 AND 149/87

O P I N I O N O F M R ADVOCATE GENERAL M I S C H O delivered on 19 April 1988 *

Mr President, Feldain case in that there is no express Members of the Court, reference to the formula which determines the power-rating of cars for tax purposes. 1. The questions submitted by the tribunal The national court, however, indicates in its de grande instance, Nancy, which are the order that its question is identical to the subject of Cases 86 to 89/87 and 149/87, question in the Feldain case and we are thus are practically identical to the question entitled to conclude that exactly the same referred by the tribunal de grande instance, problem is in issue. Mulhouse, in the proceedings between Mr Feldain and the French administration des 3. As for the substance, examination of the impôts which were the subject of the cases has not revealed any feature which judgment of the Court of 17 September was not present in the Feldain case. 1987 (Case 433/85 [1987] ECR 3521). 4. Under those circumstances I can confine 2. As for the question submitted by the myself to referring to the grounds of the tribunal de grande instance, Saint-Brieuc, abovementioned judgment of the Court and which is the subject of Case 76/87 Seguela, to the opinion which I delivered in that case it differs from the question referred in the on 16 June 1987.

5. Consequently, I propose that the Court should give the same answer as in the judgment of 17 September 1987, that is to say that a system of road tax in which one tax band comprises more power-ratings for tax purposes than the others, with the result that the normal progression of the tax is restricted in such a way as to afford an advantage to top-of-the-range cars of domestic manufacture, and in which the power-rating for tax purposes is calculated in a manner which places vehicles imported from other Member States at a disadvantage has a discrimi- natory or protective effect within the meaning of Article 95 of the Treaty.