Opinion of advocate general Sharpston in the case Klinikum Dortmund.
Sharpston is of the opinion that the Court should answer the questions raised by the Bundesfinanzhof to the following effect:
- The expression ‘closely related activities' in Article 13A(1)(b) of the Sixth Council Directive includes supplies of goods as well as supplies of services.
- In order to qualify for exemption as an activity closely related to hospital and medical care pursuant to Article 13A(1)(b) of Directive 77/388, it is not essential for a supply to be made by the person who provides the care in question.
- Supplies of goods or services which are
- closely related to the provision of medical care in the exercise of the medical and paramedical professions within the meaning of Article 13A(1)(c) of Directive 77/388,
- physically and economically dissociable from the provision of such medical care and
- not closely related to hospital and medical care within the meaning of Article 13A(1)(b) of the same directive do not qualify for exemption pursuant to either of those two provisions.