Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2018:681
Date: 2018-09-06
Language of the case: German
Court formation: Tenth Chamber
Subject matter: Free movement of goods;Common customs tariff;Customs Union
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling
Origin: Germany

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber), 6 September 2018 Customs union — Common Customs Tariff — Tariff headings — Fried instant noodles — Classification under subheading 1902 30 10 of the combined nomenclature — Criteria — concept of (dried) pasta (Council Regulation No 2658/87, as amended by Regulation No 927/2012, Annex I) The Combined Nomenclature set out in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, in the version resulting from Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 927/2012 of 9 October 2012, must be interpreted as meaning that subheading 1902 30 10 thereof covers instant noodle dishes, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, which are, in essence, composed of a block of pre-cooked and fried noodles. In that regard, it should be noted that the term ‘dried’, as used in CN subheading 1902 30 10, is not defined. The term ‘dried’, as used in CN subheading 1902 30 10, is the past participle of the verb ‘to dry’, which means, in particular, ‘make dry’ or ‘become dry’. Therefore, since the manufacture of pasta involves necessarily, first of all, the use of liquid, pasta from which the moisture is extracted in the course of its manufacture in order to bring it to a dry state may, in general, be considered to be dried pasta. In contrast, in that regard the process by which that state has been reached is not decisive. Therefore, since at the end of the production process the noodles have been packaged in a dry state, they should be considered to be ‘dried’ pasta, within the meaning of CN subheading 1902 30 10. (see paras 38, 40-42, 47, operative part)