In Meidl v Austria (ECHR Case 33951/05) the tax authorities formed the opinion that a company director (M) had been involved in carousel fraud.
He was questioned in August and September 1995 was indicted in March 2000 and was convicted in September 2002. He was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment.
He appealed to the Austrian Supreme Court which dismissed his appeal in April 2005 and increased his sentence to three years’ imprisonment. He served two years and six months in prison before being released on probation.
Following his release he applied to the ECHR for a ruling that the length of the proceedings had been a breach of Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights. the ECHR accepted this contention observing that the proceedings had begun when he was questioned in August...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
In Meidl v Austria (ECHR Case 33951/05) the tax authorities formed the opinion that a company director (M) had been involved in carousel fraud.
He was questioned in August and September 1995 was indicted in March 2000 and was convicted in September 2002. He was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment.
He appealed to the Austrian Supreme Court which dismissed his appeal in April 2005 and increased his sentence to three years’ imprisonment. He served two years and six months in prison before being released on probation.
Following his release he applied to the ECHR for a ruling that the length of the proceedings had been a breach of Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights. the ECHR accepted this contention observing that the proceedings had begun when he was questioned in August...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
