Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2557/85 of 11 September 1985 regarding the application of Decisions No 1/85, No 2/85 and No 3/85 of the ACP-EEC Customs Cooperation Committee derogating from the definition of the concept of 'originating products'
Date: 1985-09-11
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: economic cooperation, originating product













EUR-Lex - 31985R2557 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



31985R2557

Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2557/85 of 11 September 1985 regarding the application of Decisions No 1/85, No 2/85 and No 3/85 of the ACP-EEC Customs Cooperation Committee derogating from the definition of the concept of 'originating products'  


Official Journal L 244 , 12/09/1985 P. 0011 Spanish special edition: Chapter 02 Volume 14 P. 0060  Portuguese special edition Chapter 02 Volume 14 P. 0060  





*****COMMISSION  REGULATION (EEC) No 2557/85  of 11 September 1985  regarding the application of Decisions No 1/85, No 2/85 and No 3/85 of the ACP-EEC Customs Cooperation Committee derogating from the definition of the concept of 'originating products'  THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN  COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 113 thereof,  Having regard to Council Decision 81/968/EEC of 24 November 1981 on the application of derogations from the definition of originating products under the second ACP-EEC Convention (1),  Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 485/85 of 26 February 1985 concerning the application of Decision No 2/85 of the ACP-EEC Council of Ministers on transitional measures valid from 1 March 1985 (2),  Whereas the ACP-EEC Customs Cooperation Committee set up under the second ACP-EEC Convention, signed at Lomé on 31 October 1979, adopted pursuant to Articles 28 (3) and 30 (1) of Protocol 1 to that Convention, Decisions No 1/85, 2/85 and 3/85 derogating from the definition of the concept of 'originating products',  Whereas it is necessary in accordance with Article 33 of the said Protocol 1 to take the measure required to implement those Decisions,  HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:  Article 1  Decisions No 1/85, 2/85 and 3/85 of the ACP-EEC Customs Cooperation Committee annexed to this Regulation shall apply in the Community.  Article 2  This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.  This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.  Done at Brussels, 11 September 1985.  For the Commission  COCKFIELD  Vice-President  (1) OJ No L 354, 9. 12. 1981, p. 30.  (2) OJ No L 61, 1. 3. 1985, p. 1.  DECISION  No 1/85 OF THE ACP-EEC CUSTOMS COOPERATION COMMITTEE  of 7 June 1985  derogating from the definition of the concept of 'originating products' to take into account the special situation of Jamaica with regard to tufted carpets falling within heading No 58.02 of the Common Customs Tariff  THE ACP-EEC CUSTOMS COOPERATION COMMITTEE,  Having regard to the second ACP-EEC Convention signed at Lomé on 31 October 1979,  Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 485/85 of 26 February 1985 concerning the application of Decision No 2/85 of the ACP-EEC Council of Ministers on transitional measures valid from 1 March 1985 (1),  Whereas Article 30 of Protocol 1 to the Third ACP-EEC Convention, signed at Lomé on 8 December 1984, concerning the definition of the concept of originating products and methods of administrative cooperation, provides that derogations from the rules or origin may be made, in particular where the development of existing industries or the creation of new industries would be facilitated thereby;  Whereas Article 4 of Decision No 2/85 (2) states that the provisions concerning the procedure for derogating from the rules of origin, contained in Article 30 of Protocol No 1 to the Third ACP-EEC Convention, shall be applied in advance,  Whereas, to preserve its carpet industry and in order to allow it to take the necessary steps in order to obtain originating status for its finished products, Jamaica benefited from 3 October 1984 to 28 February 1985 from a derogation from the definition of the concept of 'originating products', contained in Protocol No 1 to the Second ACP-EEC Convention, for tufted carpets;  Whereas the duration of this drogation has not been sufficient to permit the Jamaican industry concerned to adapt its production to the conditions required for the acquisition of origin by the Second ACP-EEC Convention; whereas, as a result, the provisions necessary to give a continued derogation should be adopted;  Whereas, in these circumstances, a temporary derogation from the definition of the concept of originating products should be granted to Jamaica until 2 October 1986,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:  Article 1  By way of derogation from the special provisions of List A of Annex II to Protocol 1 to the Second ACP-EEC Convention, tufted carpets falling within subheading 58.02 A II a) of the Common Customs Tariff, manufactured in Jamaica, in the production of which non-originating backing falling within heading No 51.04 or 57.10 of the Common Customs Tariff is used, shall be considered as originating in Jamaica provided that the other conditions applicable to heading No 58.02 are respected.  Article 2  The derogation referred to in Article 1 shall be in respect of a quantity of 220 000 square yards of tufted carpets exported from Jamaica between 1 March 1985 and 2 October 1986.  Article 3  The Jamaican authorities shall take the steps necessary to check the quantities of exports of products referred to in Article 1 and shall forward to the Commission every three months a statement of the quantities in respect of which EUR 1 movement certificates have been issued pursuant to this Decision.  Article 4  The ACP States, the Member States and the Community shall be bound, each to the extent to which it is concerned, to take the measures necessary to implement this Decision.  Article 5  This Decision shall enter into force on the day on which, it is adopted.  However, it shall ceaye ot apply on 28 February 1986 if the Third ACP-EEC Convention has not entered into force by that date.  Done at Brussels, 7 June 1985.  For the ACP-EEC Customs  Cooperation Committee  The Chairmen  F. KLEIN Maurice Oscar ST JOHN  (1) OJ No L 61, 1. 3. 1985, p. 1.  (2) OJ No L 61, 1. 3. 1985, p. 2.  DECISION  No 2/85 OF THE ACP-EEC CUSTOMS COOPERATION COMMITTEE  of 7 June 1985  derogating from the definition of 'originating products', as regards certain fishery items, in order to take account of the special situation of Malawi, Kenya and Mauritius  THE ACP-EEC CUSTOMS COOPERATION COMMITTEE,  Having regard to the second ACP-EEC Convention signed at Lomé on 31 October 1979,  Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 485/85 of 26 February 1985 concerning the application of Decision No 2/85 of the ACP-EEC Council of Ministers on transitional measures valid from 1 March 1985 (1),  Having regard to the draft Decision submitted by the Commission,  Whereas Article 4 of the said Decision No 2/85 (2) lays down that the provisions concerning the procedure for derogating from the rules of origin contained in Article 30 of Protocol 1 to the Third ACP-EEC Convention signed at Lomé on 8 December 1984 are to be applied in advance;  Whereas the ACP States have requested a derogation from the definition given in Protocol 1 for certain fishery items falling within Common Customs Tariff heading ex 97.07 and manufactured in Malawi, Kenya and Mauritius;  Whereas Malawi and Kenya benefited from a derogation from the abovementioned definition in respect of fishery items from 1 March 1983 to 28 February 1985 and Mauritius from 1 January 1984 to 28 February 1985;  Whereas the economic conditions of production in the abovementioned countries have not changed;  Whereas the definition in Protocol 1 to the Third ACP-EEC Convention introduced a permanent new rule allowing the incorporation in certain fishery items of up to 25 % non-originating products;  Whereas, therefore, Malawi, Kenya and Mauritius should be granted a temporary derogation from the definition of the concept of originating products,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:  Article 1  By way of derogation from Protocol 1 to the Second ACP-EEC Convention, mounted fish-hooks with artificial bait and mounted fishing lines including casts, manufactured in Malawi, Kenya or Mauritius and falling within Common Customs Tariff heading ex 97.07, shall be considered as originating in Malawi, Kenya or Mauritius, provided that the value of the non-originating products used in their manufacture and falling within Common Customs Tariff heading ex 97.07 does not exceed 25 % of the value of the finished product.  Article 2  The competent authorities of the Republic of Malawi, the Republic of Kenya and Mauritius shall send to the Commission each quarter a list of the quantities for which EUR 1 movement certificates have been issued under this Decision.  Article 3  The ACP States and the Member States of the Community shall take the respective measures necessary to implement this Decision.  Article 4  This Decision shall enter into force on the date of its adoption.  It shall apply from 1 March 1985 until the entry into force of the Third ACP-EEC Convention but until 28 February 1986 at the latest.  Done at Brussels, 7 June 1985.  For the ACP-EEC Customs  Cooperation Committee  The Chairmen  F. KLEIN Maurice Oscar ST JOHN  (1) OJ No L 61, 1. 3. 1985, p. 1.  (2) OJ No L 61, 1. 3. 1985, p. 2.  DECISION  No 3/85 OF THE ACP-EEC CUSTOMS COOPERATION COMMITTEE  of 16 July 1985  derogating from the definition of the concept of 'originating products' to take account of the special situation of Mauritius with regard to its production of canned tuna  THE ACP-EEC CUSTOMS COOPERATION COMMITTEE,  Having regard to the Second ACP-EEC Convention, signed at Lomé on 31 October 1979,  Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 485/85 of 26 February 1985 concerning the application of Decision No 2/85 of the ACP-EEC Council of Ministers on transitional measures valid from 1 March 1985 (1),  Whereas Decision No 2/85 (2) states in Article 4 that the provisions concerning the procedure for derogating from the rules of origin contained in Article 30 of Protocol 1 to the Third ACP-EEC Convention, signed in Lomé on 8 December 1984, are to be applied in advance as from 1 March 1985;  Whereas Article 30 of Protocol 1 to the Third ACP-EEC Convention concerning the definition of the concept of originating products and methods of administrative cooperation makes provision for derogations to be made from the rules of origin by the Customs Cooperation Committee, in particular to facilitate the development of existing industries or the creation of new industries;  Whereas the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) States have submitted a request from the Government of Mauritius for a derogation from the definition set out in Protocol 1 in respect of canned tuna produced by Mauritius;  Whereas, in order to maintain its existing fishery industry and to take the measures necessary for its finished products to obtain originating status, Mauritius has from 1 August 1984 to 28 February 1985 benefited from a derogation from the definition set out in Protocol 1 for canned tuna;  Whereas Mauritius has already purchased a vessel with a view to supplying the canneries with raw fish for its production of canned tuna;  Whereas this vessel, while increasing its catches steadily, is not in a position to supply sufficient quantities of tuna fish for the canneries; whereas the undertaking concerned intends making use of a second fishing vessel within the coming years if experience shows that further supplies of originating fish cannot be guaranteed;  Whereas Mauritius has been unable to obtain sufficient supplies of fish originating in other ACP States; whereas the Mauritius canning industry therefore continues to be dependent upon supplies of tuna fish from third countries in order to continue its exports of canned tuna to the Community;  Whereas it is possible for Mauritius to meet its tuna fish requirements for the canneries through supplies from other developing countries; whereas, pursuant to Article 30 (5) of Protocol 1, the examination of a request for a derogation should in particular take into account such a possibility;  Whereas in these circumstances a temporary derogation from the definition of the concept of originating products should be accorded to Mauritius in accordance with Article 30 (8) of Protocol 1,  HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:  Article 1  By way of derogation from the special provisions of List A in Annex II to Protocol 1, canned tuna falling within heading No ex 16.04 of the Common Customs Tariff, manufactured in Mauritius from tuna originating in other developing countries shall be considered as originating in Mauritius under the conditions set out in this Decision.  Article 2  The derogation provided for in Article 1 shall relate to an annual quantity of 1 000 tonnes of canned tuna falling within heading No ex 16.04 of the Common Customs Tariff and exported from Mauritius between 1 March 1985 and 29 February 1988.  Article 3  The competent authorities of Mauritius shall take the necessary steps to ensure that the tuna used in the manufacture of the canned tuna referred to in Article 1 originates in other developing countries. These authorities shall also carry out quantitative checks on exports of the products referred to in Article 2 and shall forward to the Commission every three months a statement of the quantities in respect of which movement certificates EUR 1 have been issued on the basis of this Decision.  Article 4  The ACP States, the Member States and the Community shall be bound, each to the extent to which it is concerned, to take the measures necessary to implement this Decision.  Article 5  This Decision shall enter into force on the day of its adoption.  It shall apply from 1 March 1985. It shall cease to apply on 28 February 1986 if the Third ACP-EEC Convention has not entered into force by that date.  Done at Brussels, 16 July 1985.  For the ACP-EEC Customs  Cooperation Committee  The Chairmen  F. KLEIN Rudolph JOHNSON  (1) OJ No L 61, 1. 3. 1985, p. 1.  (2) OJ No L 61, 1. 3. 1985, p. 2.