alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Eric Miguel MONCADA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-5126

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 21, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
# C_2022284EN.01002501.xml

| 25.7.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 284/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.7.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 284/25

---

Judgment of the General Court of 18 May 2022 — Eurobolt and Others v Commission

(Case T-479/20) (1)

(Dumping - Extension of the anti-dumping duty imposed on imports of certain iron or steel fasteners originating in China to imports consigned from Malaysia - Compliance with a judgment of the Court of Justice - Article 266 TFEU - Re-imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty - Non-retroactivity - Effective judicial protection - Principle of good administration - Competence of the author of the act)

(2022/C 284/29)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Eurobolt BV (’s-Heerenberg, Netherlands), Fabory Nederland BV (Tilburg, Netherlands), ASF Fischer BV (Lelystad, Netherlands), Stafa Group BV (Maarheeze, Netherlands) (represented by: S. De Knop, B. Natens and A. Willems, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Maxian Rusche and G. Luengo, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/611 of 30 April 2020 re-imposing the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed by Council Regulation (EC) No 91/2009 on imports of certain iron or steel fasteners originating in the People’s Republic of China to imports of certain iron or steel fasteners consigned from Malaysia, whether declared as originating in Malaysia or not (OJ 2020 L 141, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Eurobolt BV, Fabory Nederland BV, ASF Fischer BV and Stafa Group BV to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Eurobolt BV, Fabory Nederland BV, ASF Fischer BV and Stafa Group BV to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 304, 14.9.2020.

---
QUALITY SITEWORK MATERIALS, INC. v. CADDO-BOSSIER PARISHES PORT COMMISSION, Benteler Steel/Tube Manufacturing Corp., Walbridge Aldinger, LLC F.K.A. Walbridge Aldinger Company, Hardclay, LLC, the Ohio Casualty Insurance Company, Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Hudson Insurance Company and Thomas E. Hardiman

NO. 2018-CC-1866

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

January 18, 2019

Denied.
# C_2021088EN.01001801.xml

| 15.3.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 88/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88/18

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Kammergericht Berlin (Germany) lodged on 30 December 2020 — DB Station & Service AG v ODEG Ostdeutsche Eisenbahn GmbH

(Case C-721/20)

(2021/C 88/23)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Kammergericht Berlin

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: DB Station & Service AG

Defendant: ODEG Ostdeutsche Eisenbahn GmbH

Questions referred

| 1. | Is it compatible with Directive 2001/14/EC, (1) including its provisions on the management independence of the infrastructure undertaking (Article 4), the principles of charging (Articles 7 to 12) and the tasks of the regulatory body (Article 30), for national civil courts to review the charges levied based on the criteria laid down in Article 102 TFEU and/or in national competition law on a case-by-case basis independently of the monitoring carried out by the regulatory body? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is it compatible with Directive 2001/14/EC, (1) including its provisions on the management independence of the infrastructure undertaking (Article 4), the principles of charging (Articles 7 to 12) and the tasks of the regulatory body (Article 30), for national civil courts to review the charges levied based on the criteria laid down in Article 102 TFEU and/or in national competition law on a case-by-case basis independently of the monitoring carried out by the regulatory body?

| 2. | If Question 1 is answered in the affirmative: Are the national civil courts permitted and required to conduct an assessment of abusive practices in the light of the criteria laid down in Article 102 TFEU and/or in national competition law, even where the rail transport undertakings have the possibility to request the competent regulatory body to review the fairness of the charges paid? Must the national civil courts wait for a decision in the matter by the regulatory body and, where applicable, if it is contested before the courts, for that decision to become enforceable? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If Question 1 is answered in the affirmative: Are the national civil courts permitted and required to conduct an assessment of abusive practices in the light of the criteria laid down in Article 102 TFEU and/or in national competition law, even where the rail transport undertakings have the possibility to request the competent regulatory body to review the fairness of the charges paid? Must the national civil courts wait for a decision in the matter by the regulatory body and, where applicable, if it is contested before the courts, for that decision to become enforceable?

---

(1)  Directive 2001/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2001 on the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure and safety certification (OJ 2001 L 75, p. 29).

---
S.S.S., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-4232

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 8, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
James SMITH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-3410

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 1, 2019.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Capital
Growth Systems, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the nine-month period ended September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Patrick C. Shutt, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company and I, Jim McDevitt, the Chief Financial and Accounting Officer of the Company, certify to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to l8 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: November 13, 2009



By:

/s/ Patrick C. ShuttName:

Patrick C. ShuttTitle:

Chief Executive OfficerBy:

/s/ Jim McDevittName:

Jim McDevittTitle:

Chief Financial and Accounting Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The
foregoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as an exhibit to the Report and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.



48
Exhibit 32.2   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In connection with the Quarterly Report of Parks! America, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jon Laria, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:  (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.   Date: May 15, 2009By:/s/ Jon LariaJon Laria
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
Case 3:00-cv-00815-M Document 106 Filed 12/19/03 Page 1 of 2 PageID 640
 

 Case 3:00-cv-00815-M Document 106 Filed 12/19/03 Page 2 of 2 PageID 641
Confidential - Internal Distribution

Economic Forecast: October 2016

15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4 16.1 16.2 16.3 16.4 17.1 17.2 17.3 17.4 2015 2016 2017

National Income and Product Accounts (Chained 2009$)

Percent Change: Quarterly SAAR, Annual Q4/Q4

 Gross Domestic Product 2.0 2.6 2.0 0.9 0.8 1.4 2.7 2.1 2.1 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.9 1.8 1.8

 Personal Consumption Expenditures 2.4 2.9 2.7 2.3 1.6 4.3 2.7 2.1 2.2 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.6 2.7 2.1

 Residential Fixed Investment 13.3 14.9 12.6 11.5 7.8 -7.7 -6.1 1.5 3.7 3.7 3.6 3.5 13.1 -1.3 3.6

 Business Fixed Investment 1.3 1.6 3.9 -3.3 -3.4 1.0 1.7 2.4 2.4 2.5 2.5 2.6 0.8 0.4 2.5

 Government Consumption & Investment 2.6 3.2 1.9 1.0 1.6 -1.7 -0.4 0.3 0.6 0.4 0.6 0.7 2.2 0.0 0.6

Billions of Chained 2009$

 Net Exports -521 -525 -547 -567 -566 -559 -542 -556 -563 -578 -595 -610 -540 -556 -586

 Change in Business Inventories 114 94 71 57 41 -10 12 36 44 48 55 55 84 20 50

Price Indices

Percent Change: Quarterly SAAR, Annual Q4/Q4

GDP Price Index -0.1 2.3 1.3 0.8 0.5 2.3 1.7 1.6 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.2 1.1 1.5 2.2

Consumer Price Index -2.9 2.4 1.4 0.8 -0.3 2.5 1.7 4.1 2.5 2.4 2.2 2.2 0.4 2.0 2.4

Consumer Price Index excl. Food & Energy 1.7 2.3 1.8 2.2 2.7 2.1 2.0 2.4 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.1 2.0 2.3 2.2

Employment

Unemployment Rate (Percent) 5.5 5.4 5.1 5.0 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.6 5.3 4.9 4.6

Employment, Total Nonfarm (% Change: Quarterly SAAR, Annual Q4/Q4) 2.1 1.9 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.3 1.7 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.2 0.9 2.0 1.5 1.2

Interest Rates (Percent)

Federal Funds Rate 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.1 0.4 0.5

1-Year Treasury Note Yield 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.3 0.6 0.9

10-Year Treasury Bond Yield 2.0 2.2 2.2 2.2 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.8 2.1 1.7 1.7

October 10, 2016

Note: Interest rate forecasts are based on rates from September 30, 2016.

Note: Unshaded areas denote actuals. Shaded areas denote forecasts.

Sources: Actuals: Bureau of Economic Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Federal Reserve Board. Forecasts: Fannie Mae Economic and Strategic Research

Opinions, analyses, estimates, forecasts, and other views of Fannie Mae's Economic & Strategic Research (ESR) group included in these materials should not be construed as indicating 

Fannie Mae's business prospects or expected results, are based on a number of assumptions, and are subject to change without notice. How this information affects Fannie Mae will depend 

on many factors. Although the ESR group bases its opinions, analyses, estimates, forecasts, and other views on information it considers reliable, it does not guarantee that the information provided 

in these materials is accurate, current or suitable for any particular purpose. Changes in the assumptions or the information underlying these views could produce materially different results. 

The analyses, opinions, estimates, forecasts, and other views published by the ESR group represent the views of that group as of the date indicated and do not necessarily represent the views 

of Fannie Mae or its management.

 --------------- 2015 --------------- --------------- 2016 --------------- --------------- 2017 ---------------
Charles STARKEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-2715

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 1, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
1

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

In re: )

)

GOODMAN NETWORKS, INC., ) Case No. 23-31641-mvl-7

)

Debtor. ) (Chapter 7)

)

SCOTT M. SEIDEL, TRUSTEE, )

)

Plaintiff, ) Adversary Proceeding

) No. 23-03091

v. )

)

FEDEX SUPPLY CHAIN LOGISTICS )

& ELECTRONICS, INC., )

)

Defendant. )

ORDER GRANTING 

CONSENT MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE BRIEFS 

IN EXCESS OF PAGE LIMITS SET L.B.R 7007-2(C)

United States Bankruptcy Judge

______________________________________________________________________

Signed January 10, 2024

The following constitutes the ruling of the court and has the force and effect therein described.

Case 23-03091-mvl Doc 16 Filed 01/10/24 Entered 01/10/24 14:42:56 Desc Main

Document Page 1 of 2
2

It appearing to the Court that FedEx Supply Chain Logistics & Electronics, Inc.’s 

(“FSCLE”) Consent Motion for Leave to File Briefs in Excess of Page Limits Set in L.B.R. 

7002-2(c) is well taken, it is hereby:

ORDERED that FSCLE and the Trustee are granted leave to file principal briefs in 

support of and in opposition to the Trustee’s motion for a preliminary injunction and FSCLE’s 

motion to dismiss the Trustee’s adversary complaint.

###END OF ORDER###

AGREED:

BUTLER SNOW LLP

/s/ Daniel W. Van Horn

Daniel W. Van Horn (admitted pro hac)

Adam M. Langley (admitted pro hac)

6075 Poplar Ave., Ste. 500

Memphis, TN 38119

901-680-7200 (telephone)

901-680-7201 (facsimile)

danny.vanhorn@butlersnow.com

adam.langley@butlersnow.com

Martin A. Sosland (Tx Bar No. 18855645)

2911 Turtle Creek, Suite 1400

Dallas, TX 75219

(469) 680-5502 (telephone)

469-680-5501 (facsimile)

martin.solsand@butlersnow.com

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT

85274699.v2

QUILLING, SELANDER, LOWNDS, 

WINSLETT & MOSER, P.C.

/s/ Joshua L. Shepherd

Joshua L. Shepherd (TX Bar No. 24058104)

Michael J. Quilling (TX Bar No. 16432300)

2001 Bryan Street, Suite 1800

Dallas, TX 75201

214-871-2100 (telephone)

214-871-2111 (facsimile)

jshepherd@qslwm.com

mquilling@qslwm.com

SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR THE PLAINTIFF

Case 23-03091-mvl Doc 16 Filed 01/10/24 Entered 01/10/24 14:42:56 Desc Main

Document Page 2 of 2
S.R. v. HOUSTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES

2160476

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

September 1, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Amy Renea HENLEY v. Henry Jason HENLEY

2160665

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

July 10, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

PATRICIA MCSPARRAN,

Petitioner

v.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEAL BOARD (COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA),

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 445 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 26th day of December, 2017

, the Petition for Allowance of

Appeal is DENIED

.
Cassie Alana TURNER, Appellant, v. Timothy Joseph GALVIN, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-1623

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed February 5, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
# C_2020423EN.01002102.xml

| 7.12.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 423/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.12.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 423/21

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Köln (Germany) lodged on 12 August 2020 — DP v Deutsche Lufthansa AG

(Case C-384/20)

(2020/C 423/31)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Köln

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: DP

Defendant: Deutsche Lufthansa AG

Question referred

Does a strike by the air carrier’s own employees that is called by a trade union constitute an extraordinary circumstance within the meaning of Article 5(3) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004? (1)

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1).

---
Case 2:03-cv-00140-J Document 51 Filed 12/11/03 Page 1 of 4 PageID 276
Case 2:03-cv-00140-J Document 51 Filed 12/11/03 Page 2 of 4 PageID 277
Case 2:03-cv-00140-J Document 51 Filed 12/11/03 Page 3 of 4 PageID 278
Case 2:03-cv-00140-J Document 51 Filed 12/11/03 Page 4 of 4 PageID 279
EXHIBIT 32: Rule 13a-14(b) Certification





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officers of InoLife Technologies, Inc. (Formerly NexxNow, Inc.) (the “Company”) certify that:




1. The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period  ended June 30, 2010 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and




2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Date: August 23,  2010
By:
/s/ Gary BertholdGary Berthold,Chief Executive Officer






Date: August 23,  2010
By:
/s/ Jan KaplanJan Kaplan,Chief Financial Officer
S.D.P. v. C.B.E.

2160853

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

August 24, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Order entered October 22, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-00088-CR

No. 05-13-00089-CR

EDUARDO ENRIQUE ALFARO, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 401st Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 401-82025-2011 and 401-82026-2011

ORDER

Appellee’s unopposed motion for extension of time in which to file a brief is 

GRANTED. Appellee’s brief is deemed timely filed and the Clerk is DIRECTED to file 

appellee’s brief as of the date received. 

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS 

PRESIDING JUSTICE
EX PARTE Hark D. EPHRIAM

CR-16-0677

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

September 20, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Habeas corpus pet. dismissed.
# C_2021252EN.01003904.xml

| 28.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 252/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/39

---

Order of the General Court of 11 May 2021 — Da Silva Carreira v Commission

(Case T-260/20) (1)

(2021/C 252/66)

Language of the case: French

The President of the First Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 215, 29.6.2020.

---
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of IWO Holdings, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2004 (the Report), I, Jerry E. Vaughn, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Jerry E. Vaughn    
|Jerry E. Vaughn        
|Chief Financial Officer
|                       
|November 1, 2004
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.3

                       OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE OF SERVICER

To:    The Chase Manhattan Bank, as Owner Trustee
       The Bank of New York Trust Company of Florida, National Association,
        as Indenture Trustee
       Moody's Investors Service, Inc.
       Standard & Poor's Ratings Group

   Pursuant to Section 4.10 of the Sale and Servicing Agreement dated as of
October 1, 2000 among AmSouth Auto Trust 2000-1, as Issuer, AmSouth Auto
Receivables, LLC, as Seller, AmSouth Bank, as Servicer, and The Bank of New York
Trust Company of Florida, National Association, as Indenture Trustee (the
"Agreement"), the undersigned hereby certifies that (i) a review of the
activities of Servicer from October 1, 2000 through December 31, 2000, and of
its performance under the Agreement has been made under the undersigned
officer's supervision and (ii) to the best of the undersigned officer's
knowledge, based on such review, Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations in
all material respects under the Agreement throughout such period.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have executed this Certificate this 28th day of
March, 2001.

                                      AMSOUTH BANK
                                      as Servicer

                                      By: /s/ P. K. Chatterjee
                                          ----------------------------
                                      Name: P. K. Chatterjee
                                      Title: Executive Vice President
# C_2021163EN.01000901.xml

| 3.5.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 163/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.5.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 163/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 3 March 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — VS v Hauptzollamt Münster

(Case C-7/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Customs union - Union Customs Code - Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 - Article 87(4) - Place where the customs debt is incurred - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 2(1) - Articles 70 and 71 - Chargeable event and place where the import VAT becomes chargeable - Place where the tax debt is incurred - Finding of a failure to comply with an obligation imposed by EU customs legislation - Goods which were physically introduced into the customs territory of the Union in a Member State but entered the economic network of the Union in the Member State where that finding was made)

(2021/C 163/11)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: VS

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Münster

Operative part of the judgment

The second subparagraph of Article 71(1) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that import VAT on goods subject to customs duties arises in the Member State in which it is established that an obligation imposed by EU customs legislation has not been complied with, where the goods in question, even if they have been physically introduced into the customs territory of the Union in another Member State, entered the economic network of the Union in the Member State where that finding was made.

---

(1)  OJ C 137, 27.4.2020.

---