WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1211/97 by John TOMLINSON to the Commission. Customs regulations and VAT rules
Date: 1997-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, TOMLINSON
Subjects: EU customs procedure, EU law - national law, VAT, action for failure to fulfil an obligation, infringement of EU law, interpretation of the law, judgment of the Court (EU), preliminary issue













EUR-Lex - 91997E1211 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91997E1211

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1211/97 by John TOMLINSON to the Commission. Customs regulations and VAT rules  


Official Journal C 373 , 09/12/1997 P. 0088 





WRITTEN QUESTION P-1211/97 by John Tomlinson (PSE) to the Commission (26 March 1997)Subject: Customs regulations and VAT rulesWhat steps are taken to ensure consistency of application of customs regulations and VAT rules in all Member States, in particular following a decision of the European Court? Are there set procedures, and are they consistently followed?Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (4 June 1997)Decisions of the Court of Justice may be handed down in cases of infringements (Article 169 of the EC Treaty) or upon references for a preliminary ruling (Article 177).In cases of infringements the proceedings initiated by the Commission will not be terminated until the Member State concerned complies with the Court's ruling. Within a month of the judgment the Commission sends a letter to the defaulting Member State reminding it of its obligation to take immediate steps to terminate the infringement and to notify the Commission within three months of measures taken or planned.If this has not been done within nine months of the Court's ruling the Commission may initiate further infringement proceedings. Under Article 171 of the EC Treaty the Commission can ask the Court to fine the defaulting Member State.Decisions of the Court on a reference for a preliminary ruling may relate to legislation in a single Member State or to a general interpretation of customs or tax law. Where the ruling concerns a single Member State the Commission sends a letter to that Member State asking what implementing measures it has adopted to comply with the decision. Should the Member State fail to reply or to bring its legislation into conformity with the ruling, proceedings will be initiated against it under Article 169.Where the Court's decision constitutes a general interpretation of Community law the Commission writes within two months to each Member State asking how they apply the act in question and related provisions. Again, in the absence of a reply or in cases where the legislation is found not to conform to Community law, the Commission may decide to initiate proceedings under Article 169.These matters are dealt with under the Commission's Manual of Operational Procedures, an internal handbook for official use only.Allowing for the Commission's discretion, therefore, there is indeed a set procedure for following up Court of Justice rulings.The Court of Justice decides on issues of law, not fact; it is the duty of national courts to decide in cases brought before them whether, in the light of the particular facts, the law as stated by the Court of Justice applies. Thus in its judgment on the Faeroes Seafood case (Joined Cases C-153/94 and C-204/94) delivered on 14 May 1996, the Court of Justice ruled that it was for the national court to establish, in accordance with the relevant criteria, whether the error which may have been made by the exporting country's authorities could not reasonably have been detected by the persons liable within the meaning of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1697/79 on the post-clearance recovery of import duties.According to the Commission's information a number of cases related or similar to the Faeroes Seafood case are currently before the United Kingdom courts.