Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2025:161
Date: 2025-03-06
Language of the case: French
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: France

Anonymised version 
Translation C-206/24 – 1 
Case C-206/24 
Request for a preliminary ruling 
Date lodged: 
14 March 2024 
Referring court: 
Cour de cassation (France) 
Date of the decision to refer: 
13 March 2024 
Applicants: 
YX 
Logistica I Gestio Caves andorrannes I Vida SA 
Defendants: 
Ministre de l’Économie, des Finances et de la Relance 
Directeur général des douanes et droits indirects 
  
[OMISSIS] 
FRENCH REPUBLIC 
IN THE NAME OF THE FRENCH PEOPLE 
JUDGMENT OF THE COUR DE CASSATION, CHAMBRE COMMERCIALE, 
FINANCIÈRE ET ÉCONOMIQUE (COURT OF CASSATION, 
COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL AND ECONOMIC DIVISION, FRANCE) OF 13 
MARCH 2024 
1/ YX [OMISSIS] 99000 Andorra [Principality of Andorra], 
EN 
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING OF 13. 3. 2024 – CASE C-206/24 
 
2  
Anonymised version 
2/ Logistica I Gestio Caves andorrannes I Vida, formerly named Caves 
Andorranes, a publicly owned company with its seat [in] [OMISSIS] 99000 
Andorra [Principality of Andorra], 
brought [an] [OMISSIS] appeal [OMISSIS] against the judgment of 10 February 
2020 of the cour d’appel de Toulouse (First Chamber, Section 1) (Court of 
Appeal, Toulouse, France) in the proceedings between: 
1/ the ministre de l’économie, des finances et de la relance (Minister for Economic 
Affairs, Finance and Recovery, France), residing [in] [OMISSIS] 75572 Paris 
[OMISSIS] [France] 
2/ the directeur général des douanes et droits indirects (Director-General of 
Customs and Indirect Taxes), residing [in] [OMISSIS] 93558 Montreuil 
[OMISSIS] [France], 
respondents in cassation. 
The appellants, in support of their appeal, put forward a single ground of appeal 
on a point of law.  
[OMISSIS]. 
[OMISSIS], [Procedural elements] 
[T]he Cour de Cassation (Court of Cassation) (Commercial, Financial and 
Economic Division), [OMISSIS], after deliberating in accordance with the law, 
delivered the present judgment. 
Facts and procedure 
1 According to the contested judgment ([Court of Appeal], Toulouse, 10 February 
2020), Andorran importers, between 1988 and 1991, imported into Andorra, 
through the company Ysal, a customs agent established in France, goods 
originating in particular from third (non-European) countries. Those imports 
resulted in the payment of import duties in France. 
2 On 23 January 1991, the Commission of the European Communities published an 
opinion invalidating the taxation on goods originating in third countries and 
destined for Andorra and ordering France to stop requiring, within 30 days, that 
goods destined for Andorra are to put be into free circulation in the Community 
when they cross French territory. 
3 On 9 April 2002, Ysal brought proceedings against the French customs authorities 
seeking an order that it be paid damages corresponding to the customs duties 
alleged to have been wrongly paid between 1988 and 1991 on imports into 
Andorra. On 27 January 2004, a court of first instance dismissed the application. 
LOGISTICA I GESTIO CAVES ANDORRANNES I VIDA 
 
3 
Anonymised version 
4 On 20 May 2008, Ysal brought proceedings against the French customs 
authorities before a court of first instance seeking repayment of the customs duties 
alleged to have been wrongly paid on account of import declarations made 
between 1988 and 1991. By a judgment of 15 June 2010, a court of first instance 
dismissed the action brought by Ysal as inadmissible on the ground that it lacked 
standing or interest to bring proceedings. That judgment was confirmed by a 
judgment of a court of appeal of 13 December 2011. By judgment of 21 January 
2014 [OMISSIS], the Cour de cassation (Court of Cassation) dismissed the appeal 
brought by Ysal. 
5 After having repaid Ysal for the customs duties settled on their behalf, the 
Andorran importers, the legal predecessors of Logistica I Gestio Caves 
Andorrannes I Vidal (Caves andorrannes) and YX, brought, on 16 July 2015, 
proceedings against the French customs authorities seeking the payment of a sum 
corresponding to the customs duties wrongly paid. 
6 On 4 July 2017, the tribunal de grande instance de Toulouse (Regional Court, 
Toulouse, France) rejected the action brought by Caves andorranes and YX and, 
by judgment of 10 February 2020, the cour d’appel de Toulouse (Court of Appeal, 
Toulouse) upheld the judgment.  
7 In rejecting the action brought by Caves andorrannes and YX, the cour d’appel de 
Toulouse (Court of Appeal, Toulouse) held that the customs authorities had to 
have, in order to repay on their own initiative, as provided for in Article 2 of 
Council Regulation (EEC) No 1430/79 of 2 July 1979 on the repayment or 
remission of import or export duties and in the third subparagraph of 
Article 236(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 
establishing the Community Customs Code (the Community Customs Code), the 
information necessary for determining the amounts of duties to be repaid and the 
identity of every person liable without having to carry out disproportionate 
research. 
8 Caves andorrannes and YX brought an appeal on a point of law against that 
judgment complaining that it refused to grant their requests. 
Examination of the ground of appeal 
The first part of the ground of appeal 
9 [OMISSIS]. [Aspects of national procedural law] 
The fourth part of the ground of appeal 
Statement of the ground of appeal 
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING OF 13. 3. 2024 – CASE C-206/24 
 
4  
Anonymised version 
10 Caves andorranes and YX complain that the judgment refused to grant their 
requests, although ‘customs authorities are required to repay import duties on their 
own initiative, as soon as they establish, within three years from the date of 
communication of those duties to the debtor, that the amount was not legally owed 
at the time of payment; [they submit] that by holding, in order to refuse all of the 
requests directed against the direction générale des douanes et des droits indirects 
de Midi-Pyrénée (Directorate-General of Customs and Indirect Taxes), that the 
customs authorities must, in order to make repayment on their own initiative, have 
all the information necessary for determining the amounts of duties to be repaid 
and the identity of every person liable without having to carry out disproportionate 
research, the Court of Appeal, which added a condition to the law, infringed 
Article 2 of Council Regulation No 1430/79, subsequently codified in essence in 
Article 236(2) of the Community Customs Code.  
11 The appeal raises the question as to whether the application of Article 2(2) of 
Regulation No 1430/79, now Article 236(2) of the Community Customs Code, 
requires that the customs authorities have sufficient information relating to the 
person liable for payment of the customs duties and the customs debt without 
having to carry out disproportionate research. 
12 [OMISSIS] The appeal also raises the question, out the outset, as to whether the 
repayment by customs authorities on their own initiative may take place beyond a 
period of three years from the date on which the customs duties were 
communicated to the debtor. 
13 Those questions have not been previously addressed by the Cour de cassation 
(Court of Cassation). 
Relevant law 
EU law 
14 The levying of customs duties by Member States on behalf of the Community on 
goods imported within the EU is subject only to European legislation under the 
principle of the primacy of Community law (now EU law) (judgment of 24 June 
2019 in C-573/17, Daniel Adam Poplawski, paragraphs 58 and 61). 
15 Article 2(1) of Regulation No 1430/79 provides that import duties are to be repaid 
or remitted in so far as the competent authorities are satisfied that the amount of 
such duties entered in the accounts either relates to goods in respect of which a 
customs debt has either not arisen or has been settled other than by payment or 
prescription or exceeds for any reason the amount lawfully payable . 
16 It states, in paragraph 2 thereof, that import duties are to be repaid or remitted for 
one of the reasons set out in paragraph 1 upon submission of an application to the 
appropriate customs office within a period of three years from the date on which 
those duties were entered in the accounts by the authority responsible for their 
LOGISTICA I GESTIO CAVES ANDORRANNES I VIDA 
 
5 
Anonymised version 
collection and that where the competent authorities themselves discover within 
this period that one or other of the situations described in paragraph 1 obtains, 
they are to repay or remit on their own initiative . 
17 Article 236(2) of the Community Customs Code, which applies from 1 January 
1994, and which reproduces Article 2 of Regulation No 1430/79, states that 
import duties or export duties are to be repaid or remitted upon submission of an 
application to the appropriate customs office within a period of three years from 
the date on which the amount of those duties was communicated to the debtor. 
That period is to be extended if the person concerned provides evidence that he 
was prevented from submitting his application within the said period as a result of 
unforeseeable circumstances or force majeure. Where the customs authorities 
themselves discover within this period that one or other of the situations described 
in the first and second subparagraphs of paragraph 1 exists, they are to repay or 
remit on their own initiative. 
Grounds for making the reference for a preliminary ruling 
18 On 28 June 1990, an agreement was concluded between the Principality of 
Andorra and the European Economic Community, Article 2 of which provides 
that a customs union is established between the European Economic Community 
and Andorra for the products covered by Chapters 25 to 97 of the Harmonized 
System in accordance with the procedure and conditions set out under Title I, and 
[which states] in Article 24 thereof that the agreement enters into force on 1 July 
1990. 
19 Caves andorrannes and YX submit that the obligation imposed on customs 
authorities to repay import and export duties on their own motion if they find that 
those duties have been wrongly paid, provided for in Article 2(2) of Regulation 
No 1430/79, is subject only to a time limit and that it is only if the authorities were 
to contest, more than three years after the duties were communicated to the debtor, 
that they had been wrongly paid that they would not be required [to repay or 
remit] on their own motion. 
20 They submit that those provisions do not provide that, in order to repay the duties 
wrongly paid, the customs authorities must have all the information necessary for 
determining the amounts of duties to be repaid and the identity of every person 
liable without having to carry out disproportionate research. 
21 They infer from this that the cour d’appel (Court of Appeal) added a condition to 
Article 2(2) of that regulation that it does not contain. 
22 As for the French customs authorities, they submit that they can repay import and 
export duties on their own motion only if they have all the information necessary 
to establish that such duties have been wrongly paid and must be repaid. 
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING OF 13. 3. 2024 – CASE C-206/24 
 
6  
Anonymised version 
23 They submit that, in the present case, they could have repaid the customs duties on 
their own motion only if they had all the information necessary to establish the 
need for such repayment. They add that they cannot be required to carry out 
extensive research to determine the amounts of duties to be repaid to each of the 
operators concerned. 
24 The Court of Justice of the European Union does not appear to have adopted a 
decision relating to the conditions under which the authorities must repay the 
duties if it finds that they were not owed. 
25 The Cour de cassation (Court of Cassation) asks whether Article 2(2) of 
Regulation No 1430/79 and Article 236(2) of the Community Customs Code, 
according which the competent authorities are to repay the duties on their own 
motion if they find that they were not legally owed, must be interpreted as 
meaning that the competent authorities are required to repay such duties on their 
own motion only if, in order to do so, they have all the information necessary and, 
if not, they are not required to carry out disproportionate research.  
26 With regard to the time limits within which duties wrongly paid must be repaid, 
the first Advocate General maintains that the obligation on the customs authorities 
to repay customs duties in a situation identical to that before the Cour de cassation 
(Court of Cassation) exists, pursuant to Article 2 of Regulation No 1403/79 or 
Article 236(2) of the Community Customs Code, only within a period of three 
years from the date on which the amount of the duties was communicated to the 
debtor. 
27 The Court of Justice held, on the basis of the first subparagraph of Article 236(2) 
of the Community Customs Code, that following the Court’s declaration of 
invalidity of an anti-dumping regulation, an economic operator is no longer able, 
in principle, to claim repayment of the anti-dumping duties which it has paid 
under that regulation and for which the three-year time limit laid down by 
Article 236(2) of the Customs Code has expired. Article 236(2) of the Customs 
Code imposes a three-year time limit on the repayment of customs duties not 
legally owed (judgment of 14 June 2012, Civad, C-533/10, paragraph 21). 
28 The Cour de cassation asks whether that case-law is applicable in a case in which 
the competent authorities are required to repay on their own motion. It asks, in 
essence, whether the second subparagraph of Article 2(2) of Regulation 
No 1430/79, according to which the competent authorities are to repay on their 
own motion if they find during a period of three years from the date on which the 
customs duties were entered in the accounts that they were not legally owed, must 
be interpreted as meaning that the competent authorities can no longer, beyond 
that period, make repayment on their own motion, even if it were established 
during that period that the duties were not legally owed. 
LOGISTICA I GESTIO CAVES ANDORRANNES I VIDA 
 
7 
Anonymised version 
29 There is therefore doubt as to the interpretation of Article 2(2) of Regulation 
No 1430/79 relating to the automatic repayment of duties wrongly paid, which is 
incorporated into Article 236(2) of the Community Customs Code. 
30 The questions thus arise as to whether the repayment of wrongly collected 
customs duties by customs authorities of their own motion (i) occurs within a 
period of three years [and], (ii) is subject to the latter knowing the identity of the 
operators concerned and the amounts to be repaid to each of them without it being 
necessary to carry out disproportionate research. 
31 It is therefore necessary to make a reference to the Court of Justice of the 
European Union for a preliminary ruling. 
ON THOSE GROUNDS, the Court hereby: 
Having regard to Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European 
Union; 
REFERS the following questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union 
for a preliminary ruling: 
1. Must Article 2(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1430/79 of 2 July 1979 on 
the repayment or remission of import or export duties, which is incorporated into 
the third subparagraph of Article 236(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 
of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code, be interpreted as 
meaning that the repayment of wrongly collected customs duties by customs 
authorities on their own motion is limited to a period of three years from the date 
on which those duties were entered in the accounts by the authorities responsible 
for their collection or that the customs authorities must establish, during the three 
years following the chargeable event, that the duties were not legally owed? 
2. Must Article 2(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1430/79 of 2 July 1979 on 
the repayment or remission of import or export duties, which is incorporated into 
the third subparagraph of Article 236(2) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 
of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code, be interpreted as 
meaning that the repayment of wrongly collected customs duties by customs 
authorities on their own motion is subject to the latter knowing the identity of the 
operators concerned and the amounts to be repaid to each of them without it being 
necessary to carry out extensive or disproportionate research? 
Stays the proceedings pending the decision of the Court of Justice of the European 
Union; 
[OMISSIS]. [Procedural considerations]