The ECJ Teleos decision was delivered on 27 September. The case deals with a contract between a supplier and a purchaser of goods containing a clause providing that the purchaser will be responsible for transporting the goods from a warehouse in the Member State of supply to another Member State.

There were four questions to be considered as part of the judgement. The answers to the four questions are based on interpretation of the Sixth Directive and have been taken from the ECJ Report.

• The intra-Community acquisition of goods is effected and the exemption of the intra-Community supply of goods becomes applicable only when the right to dispose of the goods as owner has been transferred to the purchaser and the supplier establishes that those goods have been dispatched or transported to another Member State and that, as a result of that dispatch or that transport, they have physically left the territory of the Member State of supply.
• The competent authorities of the Member State of supply are precluded from requiring a supplier, who acted in good faith and submitted evidence establishing, at first sight, his right to the exemption of an intra-Community supply of goods, subsequently to account for VAT on those goods where that evidence is found to be false, without, however, the supplier's involvement in the tax evasion being established, provided that the supplier took every reasonable measure in his power to ensure that the intra-Community supply he was effecting did not lead to his participation in such evasion.
• The fact that the purchaser made a declaration concerning intra-Community acquisition, such as that in question in the main proceedings, to the tax authorities of the Member State of destination may constitute additional evidence tending to establish that the goods have actually left the territory of the Member State of supply, but it does not constitute conclusive proof for the purposes of the exemption from VAT of an intra-Community supply.