Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2003:14
Date: 2003-01-14
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Free movement of goods;Customs Union
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Germany

SUMMARY — CASE C-78/01 
Summary of the Judgment 
1. Free movement of goods — Community external transit — Transportation under 
cover of a TIR carnet — Offences and irregularities — Place where the offence or 
irregularity was committed — Furnishing of proof by a guaranteeing association 
within the limitation period — Whether permissible 
(Commission Regulation No 2454/93, Arts 454(3), first subpara., and 455) 
2. Free movement of goods — Community external transit — Transportation under 
cover of a TIR carnet — Offences and irregularities — Place where the offence or 
irregularity was committed — Furnishing of proof by a guaranteeing association — 
Point at which time starts to run and length of period — Principle of legal certainty 
3. Free movement of goods — Community external transit — Transportation under 
cover of a TIR carnet — Offences and irregularities — Obligations of the Member 
State detecting an offence — Obligation to investigate the actual place where the 
offence was committed and the identity of the customs debtors — Not included 
(Commission Regulation No 2454/93, Arts 454 and 455) 
1. T h e f i r s t s u b p a r a g r a p h of 
Art ic le 454(3) of Regu la t i on 
No 2454/93 laying down provisions 
for the implementation of Regulation 
No 2913/92 establishing the Commu­
nity Customs Code does not preclude a 
guaranteeing association against which 
proceedings are brought by a Member 
State for payment of customs duties on 
the basis of the guarantee contract it 
has concluded with that State in 
accordance with the TIR Convention 
from being able to furnish proof of the 
place where the offence or irregularity 
was committed, provided that that 
proof is furnished within the period 
laid down in that provision, that time-
limit being peremptory. 
(see para. 58, operative part 1) 
2. T h e f i r s t s u b p a r a g r a p h of 
Article 454(3) and Article 455 of 
Regulation No 2454/93 laying down 
provisions for the implementation of 
Regulation No 2913/92 establishing 
the Community Customs Code must 
be interpreted as meaning that the 
period within which a guaranteeing 
association against which proceedings 
are brought by a Member State for 
payment of customs duties on the basis 
of the guarantee contract it has con­
cluded with that State in accordance 
with the TIR Convention may furnish 
proof of the place where the offence or 
irregularity was committed is two years 
running from the date of the claim for 
payment made to it. 
As those provisions are manifestly 
erroneous and provide for several 
periods which could be taken into 
I - 9544 
BGL 
consideration, and having regard to the 
principle of legal certainty which con­
stitutes a general principle of Commu­
nity law and requires in particular that 
rules imposing charges on a taxpayer 
are clear and precise so that he can 
ascertain unequivocally what his rights 
and obligations are and take steps 
accordingly, the period applicable to 
the guaranteeing association is the one 
which is most favourable to it out of 
those which may be identified by the 
various references made in Articles 454 
and 455 of the implementing regu­
lation. 
(see paras 71-73, operative part 2) 
3. Articles 454 and 455 of Regulation 
No 2454/93 laying down provisions 
for the implementation of Regulation 
No 2913/92 establishing the Commu­
nity Customs Code do not require the 
Member State which detects an offence 
or irregularity in connection with a 
transport operation under cover of a 
TIR carnet, in addition to making the 
n o t i f i c a t i o n s p r e s c r i b e d in 
Article 455(1) of that regulation and 
an enquiry to the office of destination, 
to investigate the actual place where 
the offence or irregularity was com­
mitted and the identity of the customs 
debtors, by seeking the administrative 
assistance of another Member State for 
elucidation of the facts. 
(see para. 84, operative part 3) 
I - 9545