# C_2006165EN.01001001.xml

| 15.7.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 165/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.7.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 165/10

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 11 May 2006 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof te Amsterdam (Netherlands)) — Friesland Coberco Dairy Foods BV, trading as Friesland Supply Point Ede v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst/Douane Noord/kantoor Groningen

(Case C-11/05) (1)

1

(Community Customs Code - Arrangements for processing under customs control - Refusal by the national customs authorities of an application for authorisation for processing under customs control - Binding nature of the conclusions of the Customs Code Committee - None - Jurisdiction of the Court to rule on the validity of those conclusions in the context of Article 234 EC - None - Interpretation of Article 133(e) of the Customs Code - Interpretation of Articles 502(3) and 504(4) of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 - Overall assessment of all the circumstances of the application for authorisation)

(2006/C 165/16)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Gerechtshof te Amsterdam

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Friesland Coberco Dairy Foods BV, trading as Friesland Supply Point Ede

Applicant:

Defendant: Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst/Douane Noord/kantoor Groningen

Defendant:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Gerechtshof te Amsterdam — Interpretation of Article 133(e) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1992 L 302, p.1) — Meaning of ‘without adversely affecting the essential interests of Community producers of similar goods’ (economic situation) — Arrangements for processing under customs control — Interpretation of Articles 502(3), 504(4) and 552 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 2003 laying down provisions for the implementation of Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 (OJ 1993 L 253, p.1), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 993/2001 (OJ 2001 L 141, p.1), and of Annex 76, Part B, thereto — Authorisation –Committee's conclusions — Assessment by the Court of Justice — Jurisdiction

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | In the assessment of an application for authorisation for processing under customs control pursuant to Article 133(e) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2700/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2000, account must be taken not only of the market for the finished products but also of the economic situation of the market for the raw materials used to produce those products. |
| --- | --- |

1.

In the assessment of an application for authorisation for processing under customs control pursuant to Article 133(e) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2700/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2000, account must be taken not only of the market for the finished products but also of the economic situation of the market for the raw materials used to produce those products.

| 2. | The criteria to be taken into consideration when assessing ‘processing activities to be created or maintained’ within the meaning of Article 133(e) of Regulation No 2913/92, as amended by Regulation No 2700/2000, and Article 502(3) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 993/2001 of 4 May 2001, may include the criterion relating to the creation of a minimum number of jobs on account of the processing activities envisaged, but is not limited to that criterion. Those criteria depend on the nature of the processing activity concerned, and the national customs authority responsible for examining the economic conditions under those provisions must make an overall assessment of all the relevant factors, including those concerning the number of jobs created, the value of the investment made and the permanence of the activity envisaged. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The criteria to be taken into consideration when assessing ‘processing activities to be created or maintained’ within the meaning of Article 133(e) of Regulation No 2913/92, as amended by Regulation No 2700/2000, and Article 502(3) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 993/2001 of 4 May 2001, may include the criterion relating to the creation of a minimum number of jobs on account of the processing activities envisaged, but is not limited to that criterion. Those criteria depend on the nature of the processing activity concerned, and the national customs authority responsible for examining the economic conditions under those provisions must make an overall assessment of all the relevant factors, including those concerning the number of jobs created, the value of the investment made and the permanence of the activity envisaged.

| 3. | The validity of conclusions of the Customs Code Committee issued in accordance with Article 133(e) of Regulation No 2913/92, as amended by Regulation No 2700/2000, cannot be examined within the framework of Article 234 EC. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The validity of conclusions of the Customs Code Committee issued in accordance with Article 133(e) of Regulation No 2913/92, as amended by Regulation No 2700/2000, cannot be examined within the framework of Article 234 EC.

| 4. | The Customs Code Committee's conclusion is not binding on national customs authorities when they are determining an application for authorisation for processing under customs control. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The Customs Code Committee's conclusion is not binding on national customs authorities when they are determining an application for authorisation for processing under customs control.

---

(1)  OJ C 82, 2.4.2005.

1

---