Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2004:354
Date: 2004-12-07
Language of the case: Dutch
Court formation: Fifth Chamber
Based on: Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (1957)
Subject matter: Free movement of goods;Customs Union;Charges having an equivalent effect
Concepts: Own resources of the Communities;Exports
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded
Origin: Netherlands

Summary of the Judgment Own resources of the European Communities – Repayment or remission of import or export duties – Article 13 of Regulation No 1430/79 – Concept of ‘import and export duty’ – Amount due on the ground that C sugar was not exported – Not included – Rejection of an application for remission – Breach of Article 13, of the principles of equality or legal certainty or a supposed principle of equity – None (Council Regulations Nos 1430/79, Arts 1, 13 and 14, and 1785/81, Art. 26; Commission Regulation No 2670/81, Art. 3) The charge imposed on a sugar producer under Article 26 of Regulation No 1785/81 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector and Article 3 of Regulation No 2670/81 laying down detailed implementing rules in respect of sugar production in excess of the quota by reason of the non-disposal of certain quantities of C sugar outside the Community does not constitute an import or export duty for the purposes of Articles 13 and 14 of Regulation No 1430/79 on the repayment or remission of import or export duties, which allow for such a repayment or remission in the special situations which result from circumstances in which no deception or obvious negligence may be attributed to the person concerned. The charge does not constitute a customs duty or a charge having equivalent effect or an agricultural charge within the meaning of Article 1(2)(a) and (b) of Regulation No 1430/79. Nor, having regard to its objectives and the basis of its calculation, can it be considered as being converted into an import duty, since, unlike such a duty, it is a penalty which is primarily deterrent in nature and is intended to ensure that the prohibition on disposing of C sugar on the internal market is complied with. Accordingly, a Commission decision rejecting the application for remission as inadmissible under Article 13 of Regulation No 1430/79 does not infringe those provisions. Furthermore, such a decision does not infringe the principles of equality and legal certainty and a supposed principle of equity. (see paras 38, 44-45, 47, 58, 61-62)