62020CJ0230_INF
Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 20 May 2021 – BTA Baltic Insurance Company
(Case C‑230/20) (
1
)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling – Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 – Community Customs Code – Article 195 – Article 232(1)(a) – Article 221(3) – Common Customs Tariff – Recovery of the amount of the customs debt – Communication of the amount of duty to the debtor – Limitation period – Action taken against the guarantor to enforce the guarantee – Enforcement for the purposes of payment – Reasonable period)
1.
Customs union – Incurrence and recovery of a customs debt – Guarantee for the customs debt – Communication of the amounts of the duties to the debtor within a period of three years from the date on which the customs debt was incurred – Concept of a ‘debtor’ – Deposit constituting the guarantee for the customs debt – Not included – Limitation period – Applicability – None
(Council Regulation No 2913/92, as amended by Regulation No 1186/2009, Arts 195 and 221(1) and (3))
(see paras 35-38, operative part 1)
2.
Customs union – Incurrence and recovery of a customs debt – Obligation on Member States to avail themselves of all options open under the legislation in force to secure payment of duties – Scope – Enforcement – Action taken against the guarantor to enforce the guarantee – Included
(Council Regulation No 2913/92, as amended by Regulation No 1186/2009, Art. 232(1)(a), first and second subparas)
(see paras 42, 43, operative part 2)
3.
EU law – Principles – Legal certainty – Scope – Recovery of a customs debt – Action taken against the guarantor to enforce the guarantee – Observance of a reasonable limitation period
(Council Regulation No 2913/92, as amended by Regulation No 1186/2009)
(see paras 47, 48, operative part 3)
Operative part
1.
Article 195 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code, as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1186/2009 of 16 November 2009 setting up a Community system of reliefs from customs duty, must be interpreted as meaning that the guarantor of a customs debt referred to in that article cannot be regarded as a ‘debtor’ within the meaning of Article 221(3) of Regulation No 2913/92, as amended by Regulation No 1186/2009, and, therefore, the limitation period of three years from the date on which the customs debt was incurred laid down in that provision does not apply to that guarantor.
2.
Article 232(1)(a) of Regulation No 2913/92, as amended by Regulation No 1186/2009, must be interpreted as meaning that the obligation on the Member States, laid down in that provision, to avail themselves of all options open to them under the legislation in force to secure payment of duties applies not only to the debtor, but also to the guarantor, and that the latter can therefore be regarded, pursuant to Article 232(1)(a), as the person subject to enforcement and to whom the Member State’s rules on enforcement, including those on time limits, apply.
3.
The rule implied by the principle of legal certainty which requires a reasonable limitation period to be observed must be interpreted as meaning that it applies to the action brought against the guarantor in order to secure the recovery of a customs debt.
(
1
)	OJ C 255, 3.8.2020.