aud in the form of denying rights relied on from the VAT Directive, where such rights are derived in cases of established tax fraud or where there has been a failure to comply with the conditions of good faith.

Of particular interest to this paper is the extent to which a general principle may emerge, and whether the principle of prohibition of abuse of EU law may be regarded as a constitutional general principle of EU law. This will be done by examining the relevant case law of the Court and the recent trends, which, in the opinion of the author, confirm the notion that there is one general principle of abuse of EU law.

Part I: The Notion of Abuse in EU law
Early linguistic discrepancies notwithstanding, the author contends that there is indeed only one concept of abuse. This will be highlighted by the willingness of the Court to shore up the early, implied references to “abuse”, and finally settle on terming it as such.

1 Prohibition of abuse as a judicial rule
The principle of prohibition of abuse in EU case law is a recognised concept, which according to many enjoys the legal status of a general principle.

At the beginning, it was applied in a fundamental freedom context and then in almost every field of law not only reserved to Union competence, but also to the extensive interpretation of treaty and directive dispositions. Overtime the Court has denationalised abuse. It thus applies it in light of Union law, not national law.