Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2012:556
Date: 2012-09-06
Language of the case: Latvian
Court formation: Second Chamber
Subject matter: Free movement of goods;Common customs tariff;Customs Union
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Latvia

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber), 6 September 2012 1. European Union law — Interpretation — Provision making no express reference to the law of the Member States — Autonomous and uniform interpretation 2. Customs union — Common Customs Tariff — Relief from import duties — Concept of personal property — The term ‘property intended … for meeting … household needs’ — Private motor vehicle used free of charge by a member of the importer’s family — Included — Conditions (Council Regulation No 918/83, Arts 2 and 7(1)) 1. See the text of the decision. (see para. 22) 2. Articles 2 and 7(1) of Regulation No 918/83 setting up a Community system of reliefs from customs duty must be interpreted as meaning that a private motor vehicle imported from a third country into the customs territory of the European Union may be imported free of import duties provided that the importer has actually transferred his normal place of residence to the customs territory of the European Union, which is a matter for the national court to determine. A motor vehicle used free of charge by a member of that importer’s family, that is by a person living under the same roof as the importer or mainly dependent on him, a matter for the national court to determine, is to be regarded as being intended for meeting the needs of the importer’s household, and that use does not result in loss of entitlement to the relief in question. (see para. 39 and operative part)