Notes concerning Protocol 1 to Annex V of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, concerning the definition of the concept of originating products and methods of administrative cooperation
Date: 2002-09-25
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: ACP countries, administrative cooperation, movement certificate, originating product, protocol to an agreement, trade agreement

C 228/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25.9.2002

Notes concerning Protocol 1 to Annex V of the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement, concerning the
definition of the concept of originating products and methods of administrative cooperation (1)

(2002/C 228/02)

1. ARTICLE 1(F) — EX-WORKS PRICE

The ex-works price of a product shall include:

— the value of all materials used in manufacture,

— all costs (material costs as well as other costs) effectively
incurred by the manufacturer. For example, the ex-works
price of recorded video cassettes, records, discs, media-
carrying computer
such products
comprising an element of intellectual property rights shall
as far as possible include all costs with regard to the use of
intellectual property rights for the manufacture of
the
goods, paid for by the manufacturer, whether or not the
holder of such rights has his seat or residence in the
country of production.

software and other

The amount of non-originating tuna which, by application of
the value tolerance rule, may be used up to 15 % of
the
ex-works price of a given product is calculated as below:

A. Identify under which sub-heading(s) of

the Harmonised
the non-originating tuna used is
System (6-digit code)
In other words,
classified in the Harmonised System.
the non-originating tuna used is
determine whether
yellowfin
0303 41),
albacore
(HS 0302 32 or 0303 42),
skipjack (HS 0302 33 or
0303 43), bigeye tuna (HS 0302 34 or 0303 44), bluefin
tuna (HS 0302 35 or 0303 45), southern bluefin tuna
(HS 0302 36 or 0303 46) or other tuna (HS 0302 39 or
0303 49).

(HS 0302 31

or

No account shall be taken of commercial price reductions (e.g.
for early payment, or large quantity deliveries).

B.

2. ARTICLE 2 — GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

Originating products made up of materials ‘wholly obtained’ or
‘sufficiently processed’
in two or more ACP States are
considered as products originating in the ACP State where
the last working or processing took place, provided that the
operations carried out go beyond those referred to in Article 5.

Example:

Australian woollen yarn (HS 51)
is imported into Jamaica
where it is made into fabrics (HS 5111). These fabrics are
then sent to Guyana where they are made up into garments
(HS 62). As garments of Chapter 62 must be manufactured
from yarn, this requirement has been met if the processing
the ACP States concerned is taken into
carried out
account, and the garments are considered as originating in
Guyana.

in all

If these garments are sent to Suriname for the affixing of labels,
the garments will not be considered as originating in Suriname
and continue to be originating in Guyana.

3. ARTICLE 4 — APPLICATION OF THE VALUE TOLERANCE

RULE IN THE TUNA PROCESSING INDUSTRY

For the application of the value tolerance rule in the tuna
is defined as all
the ‘given product’
processing industry,
processed
single
under
movement certificate EUR.1, obtained from the same specie
and classified under the same subheading of the Community's
Combined Nomenclature (CN 8-digit code).

cover of one

exported

tuna,

‘A’

Identify under which CN subheading (8-digit code)
the
processed tuna obtained from the non-originating tuna
is classified in the Community's
identified under
Combined Nomenclature.
In other words, determine
whether the processed tuna in the production of which
non-originating
oil
in
tuna
tuna in brine
(CN 1604 14 11),
(CN 1604 14 18) or other prepared or preserved tuna
(CN 1604 20 70).

tuna
loins (CN 1604 14 16),

used,

is

is

C. Determine for the HS sub-heading(s) identified under A, the
respective values of the non-originating tuna used to obtain
the processed tuna identified under B and to be exported
under cover of a movement certificate EUR.1 (or invoice
declaration).

D. Determine the ex-works price of

the processed tuna
identified under B and to be covered by the movement
certificate EUR.1 (or invoice declaration).

E. Calculate whether the amounts determined under C exceed
15 % of the corresponding amounts determined under D.

If non-originating tuna has been used and the
entire
consignment qualifies for preferential origin by application of
the value tolerance rule, the application for the issue of the
movement certificate EUR.1 or the invoice declaration must
be endorsed by the exporter with:
‘Value tolerance applied
for . . .’ (2).

The endorsement referred to above shall be inserted in the
‘Remarks’ box of the movement certificate EUR.1 or added to
the invoice declaration.

(1) OJ L 317, 15.12.2000, p. 94.

(2) Description of species and type of the product in question.

25.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 228/3

Example 1:

Details of the consignment:

Raw material

Skipjack (HS 0303 43)

Yellowfin (HS 0303 42)

Albacore (HS 0303 41)

Quantity

Price

Status

10 tons

10 tons

10 tons

EUR 850/ton

EUR 1 200/ton

EUR 2 200/ton

100 % originating

— 5 % non-originating

100 % originating

Exported product

in oil
(CN 1604 14 11)
5,4 tons

— 95 % originating

in oil
(CN 1604 14 11)
5,7 tons

in brine
(CN 1604 14 18)
6 tons

Total ex-works price

EUR 12 000

EUR 16 000

EUR 28 000

Calculation:

D. Determine the ex-works price of

the processed tuna

A. Identify under which sub-heading(s) of

the Harmonised
the non-originating tuna used is

System (6-digit code)
classified in the Harmonised System:

identified under B

— EUR 16 000

— Yellowfin (HS 0303 42)

B.

Identify under which CN subheading (8-digit code)
the
processed tuna obtained from the non-originating tuna
identified under
is classified in the Community's
Combined Nomenclature.

‘A’

E. Calculate whether the amounts determined under C exceed
15 % of the corresponding amounts determined under D

— 600 : 160 ¼ 3; 75 < 15 %

— Tuna in oil (CN 1604 14 11)

Conclusion:

C. Determine for the sub-heading(s)

identified under A, the
the non-originating tuna used to

respective values of
obtain the processed tuna identified under B

— ð10 tons (cid:2) 5 %Þ (cid:2) EUR 1 200 ¼ EUR 600

Example 2:

Details of the consignment:

Raw material

Skipjack (HS 0303 43)

The entire consignment qualifies for preferential origin. The
application for the issue of the movement certificate EUR.1
or the invoice declaration must be endorsed by the exporter
with the
tolerance applied for
yellowfin in oil of CN 1604 14 11’.

following phrase:

‘Value

Quantity

Price

Status

Exported product

30 tons

EUR 850/ton

— 5 % non-originating (used for production of tuna in oil)

— 95 % originating

in oil
(CN 1604 14 11)
9,8 tons

flakes
(CN 1604 20 70)
1,6 tons

in brine
(CN 1604 14 18)
4,9 tons

Total ex-works price

EUR 21 600

EUR 3 000

EUR 12 000

C 228/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25.9.2002

Calculation:

D. Determine the ex-works price of

the processed tuna

A. Identify under which sub-heading(s) of

the Harmonised
the non-originating tuna used is

System (6-digit codes)
classified in the Harmonised System:

identified under B

— EUR 21 600

— Skipjack (HS 0303 43)

B.

Identify under which CN subheading (8-digit code)
the
processed tuna obtained from the non-originating tuna
identified under
is classified in the Community's
Combined Nomenclature.

‘A’

E. Calculate whether the amounts determined under C exceed
15 % of the corresponding amounts determined under D

— 1 275 : 216 ¼ 5; 90 < 15 %

— Tuna in oil (CN 1604 14 11)

Conclusion:

C. Determine for the sub-heading(s)

identified under A, the
the non-originating tuna used to

respective values of
obtain the processed tuna identified under B

— ð30 tons (cid:2) 5 %Þ (cid:2) EUR 850 ¼ EUR 1 275

The entire consignment qualifies for preferential origin. The
application for the issue of the movement certificate EUR.1
or the invoice declaration must be endorsed by the exporter
with the following phrase: ‘Value tolerance applied for skipjack
in oil of CN 1604 14 11’.

Example 3:

Details of the consignment:

Raw material

Skipjack (HS 0303 43)

Albacore (HS 0303 41)

Quantity

Price

Status

Exported product

9 tons

EUR 850/ton

10 tons

EUR 1 200/ton

— 10 % non-originating (used for production of tuna

100 % originating

in oil and tuna in brine)

— 90 % originating

in oil
(CN 1604 14 11)
3,3 tons

in brine
(CN 1604 14 18)
1,6 tons

in brine
(CN 1604 14 18)
5,7 tons

Total ex-works price

EUR 7 000

EUR 3 500

EUR 15 000

Calculation:

A. Identify under which sub-heading(s) of

the Harmonised
the non-originating tuna used is

System (6-digit code)
classified in the Harmonised System:

— Skipjack (HS 0303 43)

B.

Identify under which CN subheading (8-digit code)
the
processed tuna obtained from the non-originating tuna
is classified in the Community's
identified under
Combined Nomenclature.

‘A’

— B.1: Tuna in oil (CN 1604 14 11)

C. Determine for the sub-heading(s)

identified under A, the
the non-originating tuna used to

respective values of
obtain the processed tuna identified under B

— B.1: ð6 tons (cid:2) 10 %Þ (cid:2) EUR 850 ¼ EUR 510

— B.2: ð3 tons (cid:2) 10 %Þ (cid:2) EUR 850 ¼ EUR 255

D. Determine the ex-works price of

the processed tuna

identified under B

— B.1: EUR 7 000

— B.2: Tuna in brine (CN 1604 14 18)

— B.2: EUR 3 500

25.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 228/5

E. Calculate whether the amounts determined under C exceed
15 % of the corresponding amounts determined under D

— B.1: 510 : 70 ¼ 7; 29 < 15 %

— B.2: 255 : 35 ¼ 7; 29 < 15 %

Conclusion:

The entire consignment qualifies for preferential origin. The
application for the issue of the movement certificate EUR.1
or the invoice declaration must be endorsed by the exporter
with the following phrase: ‘Value tolerance applied for skipjack
in
brine
(CN 1604 14 18)’.

(CN 1604 14 11)

skipjack

and

oil

in

Example 4:

Details of the consignment:

Raw material

Skipjack (HS 0303 43)

Albacore (HS 0303 41)

Quantity

Price

Status

Exported product

10 tons

EUR 850/ton

10 tons

EUR 1 200/ton

— 15 % non-originating (used for production of tuna

100 % originating

in oil)

— 85 % originating

in oil
(CN 1604 14 11)
3,6 tons

in brine
(CN 1604 14 18)
1,8 tons

in brine
(CN 1604 14 18)
5,7 tons

Total ex-works price

EUR 7 600

EUR 3 600

EUR 15 000

Calculation:

A. Identify under which sub-heading(s) of

the Harmonised
the non-originating tuna used is

System (6-digit code)
classified in the Harmonised System:

E. Calculate whether the amounts determined under C exceed
15 % of the corresponding amounts determined under D

— 1 275 : 76 ¼ 16; 78 < 15 %

— Skipjack (HS 0303 43)

Conclusion:

B.

Identify under which CN subheading (8-digit code)
the
processed tuna obtained from the non-originating tuna
identified under
is classified in the Community's
Combined Nomenclature.

‘A’

Not the entire consignment qualifies for preferential origin. A
movement certificate EUR.1 or invoice declaration cannot be
issued/made out for the tuna in oil (CN 1604 14 11).

— Tuna in oil (CN 1604 14 11)

C. Determine for the sub-heading(s)

identified under A, the
the non-originating tuna used to

respective values of
obtain the processed tuna identified under B

— ð10 tons (cid:2) 15 %Þ (cid:2) EUR 850 ¼ EUR 1 275

D. Determine the ex-works price of

the processed tuna

identified under B

— EUR 7 600

4. ARTICLE 6 — CUMULATION OF ORIGIN

4.1. Cumulation with the OCT and the Community

4.1.1. Cumulation with materials

originating

in the

Community or in the OCT

already

obtained
have
Products which
Community or OCT origin and which are
further processed in the ACP will be considered
the
as originating in the ACP provided that
operations
those
referred to in Article 5.

beyond

carried

out

go

C 228/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25.9.2002

Example 1:

4.2. Cumulation with South Africa

Fish (HS Chapter 3) originating in St Pierre and
Miquelon (OCT) are transported to Jamaica
(ACP) where they are processed into preserved
be
fish
considered as originating in Jamaica.

preserves will

(HS 1604).

The

Example 2:

Fish (HS Chapter 3) originating in St Pierre and
Miquelon and processed into preserved fish
(HS 1604) in St Pierre and Miquelon are trans-
ported to Jamaica where labels are affixed and
the products placed in boxes. As the operation
in Jamaica is a minimal one, the preserves will
be considered as originating in St Pierre and
Miquelon.

4.1.2. Cumulation of working and processing

Non-originating products processed in the
Community or in the OCT without obtaining
origin and which are further processed in the
ACP will be considered as originating in the
ACP provided all operations carried out and
taken
the
are
together
meaning of Article 4.

sufficient within

Example 1:

is imported
Australian woollen yarn (HS 51)
into the Community where it
is made into
fabrics (HS 5111). These fabrics are then sent
to Guyana where they are sewn together into
garments (HS 62). As garments of Chapter 62
must
this
requirement has been met
the processing
carried out in the Community, the OCT and
the ACP
taken into
account, and the garments are considered as
originating in Guyana.

from yarn,
if

be manufactured

concerned is

States

Example 2:

is imported
Australian woollen yarn (HS 51)
into the Community where it
is made into
fabrics (HS 5111). These fabrics are then sent
to Guyana where they are dyed. Fabrics of
HS 5111 are originating if they are obtained
from natural fibres or under certain conditions
when they are printed accompanied by two
preparatory or
a
result, the non-originating fabric which is dyed
in Guyana will not obtain ACP origin.

finishing operations. As

4.2.1. Cumulation with materials originating in South

Africa (1)

Products which have already obtained South
African origin and which are further processed
in the ACP will be considered as originating in
the ACP provided the value added in the ACP
exceeds the value of the materials used orig-
inating in South Africa.

Example:

Cotton fabrics (HS 52) originating from South
Africa are made into garments (HS 62)
in
Mauritius. These garments are considered as
originating in Mauritius, provided the value
added in Mauritius exceeds the value of
the
cotton fabric.

4.2.2. Cumulation of working and processing within SACU

Non-originating products processed in South
Africa without obtaining origin and which are
further processed in an ACP State, Member State
of SACU, will be considered as originating in
the ACP provided all operations carried out
and taken together, are sufficient within the
meaning of Article 4.

Example:

is imported
Australian woollen yarn (HS 51)
into South Africa where it is made into fabrics
(HS 5111). These fabrics are then sent
to
Namibia where they are sewn together into
garments (HS 62). Garments of Chapter 62
are originating if manufactured from yarn.
This requirement has been met if the processing
carried out in all SACU countries is taken into
account. As
are
considered as originating in Namibia.

garments

result,

the

a

5. ARTICLE 9 — ORIGIN RULE FOR SETS

The origin rule for sets applies only to sets within the meaning
of General Rule 3 for the interpretation of the Harmonised
System.

According to this provision each product of which the set is
composed, with the exception of products the value of which
does not exceed 15 per cent of the total value of the set, must
the origin criteria for the heading under which the
fulfil
product would have been classified if
it were a separate
product and not included in a set regardless of the heading
under which the whole set is classified in accordance with the
text of the General Rule referred to above.

(1) Subject to the provisions of Article 6(8) of Protocol 1.

25.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 228/7

These provisions remain applicable even if the 15 % tolerance
is used for that product which under the text of the General
Rule referred to above determines the classification of
the
whole set.

6. ARTICLE 14 — DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE FOR USED

GOODS

Evidences of origin may be issued also for used or any other
goods where, because of a considerable time lapse between the
date of production or importation on the one hand and the
date of exportation on the other hand, the usual supporting
documents are no longer available, provided that:

(a) the date of production or importation of the goods lies
beyond that period of time during which, according to
the respective legislation in the country of exportation,
records must be kept by traders;

(b) the goods can be deemed to be originating on the grounds
of other evidences, like declarations of the producer or any
other trader, an expert's opinion, by marks on the goods or
descriptions of them, etc.;

(c) there is no indication that the goods do not comply with

the requirements of the origin rules.

7. ARTICLE 14 (AND 23) — SUBMISSION OF PROOF OF
ORIGIN IN CASE OF ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION OF
THE IMPORT DECLARATION

rests with these

In cases where import declarations are transmitted elec-
tronically to the customs authorities of the importing State,
it
to decide, within the
framework and according to the provisions of the customs
legislation applicable in the importing State, when and to
what extent the documents constituting evidence of originating
status shall actually be submitted.

authorities

8. ARTICLE 15 — DESCRIPTION OF GOODS ON MOVEMENT

CERTIFICATE EUR.1

Cases of large consignments

When the box, on the movement certificate EUR.1, provided
for the description of the goods is insufficient to permit spec-
ification of the necessary particulars for identifying the goods,
particularly in the case of large consignments, the exporter may
specify the goods to which the certificate relates on attached
invoices of the goods and, if necessary, additional commercial
documents on condition that:

(a) the invoice numbers are shown in Box 10 of

the

movement certificate EUR.1;

(b) the invoices and, where relevant, additional commercial
documents are firmly attached to the certificate prior to
presentation to customs; and

(c)

the customs authorities have stamped the invoice and
additional
attaching
commercial documents, officially
them to the certificates.

9. ARTICLE 15 — GOODS EXPORTED BY A CUSTOMS

CLEARANCE AGENT

A customs clearance agent may be allowed to act as the auth-
orised representative of the person who is the owner of the
goods or has a similar right of disposal over them, even in
cases where the person is not situated in the exporting country,
as long as the agent is in a position to prove the originating
status of the goods.

10. ARTICLE 16 — TECHNICAL REASONS

A movement certificate EUR.1 may be rejected for ‘technical
reasons’ because it was not made out in the prescribed manner.
These are the cases which may give rise to subsequent presen-
tation of a certificate issued retrospectively and they include, by
way of example, the following:

— the movement certificate EUR.1 has been made out on a
form other than the prescribed one (e.g. no guilloche back-
in size or
ground, differs significantly from the model
colour, no serial number, not printed in one of
the
officially-prescribed languages),

— one of the mandatory boxes (e.g. Box 4 on the EUR.1) has

not been filled in (1),

— the movement certificate EUR.1 has not been stamped and

signed (i.e. in Box 11),

— the movement certificate EUR.1 is endorsed by a non-auth-

orised authority,

— the stamp used is a new one which has not yet been

notified,

— the movement certificate EUR.1 presented is a copy or

photocopy rather than the original,

(1) If the goods description box (box 8) is not filled in, please refer to
the note on Article 32: refusal of preferential treatment without
verification

C 228/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25.9.2002

— the entry in boxes 2 or 5 refers to a country that does not

belong to the Agreement (e.g. Israel or Cuba).

In cases where there is no ex-works price owing to the fact that
the consignment is supplied free of charge, the customs value
established by the authorities of the country of importation
shall be considered as the basis for the value limit.

Action to be taken:

should

document

be marked

The
‘DOCUMENT NOT
ACCEPTED’, stating the reason(s), and then returned to the
importer in order to enable him to get a new document
issued retrospectively. The customs authorities, however, may
keep a photocopy of the rejected document for the purposes of
post-clearance verification or
for
suspecting fraud.

they have grounds

if

13. ARTICLE 20 — APPROVED EXPORTER

The term ‘exporter’ may refer to persons or undertakings,
regardless of whether they are producers or traders, as long
as they comply with all the other provisions of this Protocol.
Customs clearance agents may not be granted approved
exporter status within the meaning of this Protocol.

11. ARTICLE 19 — PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF THE
PROVISIONS CONCERNING INVOICE DECLARATION

The following guidelines shall apply:

The status of approved exporter may be granted only after an
exporter has submitted a written application. When examining
particular
this,
consideration to the following points:

authorities

customs

should

give

the

(a) The indication of non-originating products and therefore
products which are not covered by the invoice declaration
should not be made on the declaration itself. However, this
indication should appear on the invoice in a precise way so
as to avoid any misunderstandings.

— whether the exporter exports regularly: here, rather than
focusing on a given number of consignments or a
particular sum, the customs authorities should look into
how regularly the operator carries out such operations,

(b) Declarations made on photocopied invoices are acceptable
the
the original.
to sign
required to sign invoice

provided such declarations bear
exporter under
Approved exporters who are authorised not
invoice declarations are not
declarations made on photocopied invoices.

the same conditions as

the signature of

(c) An invoice declaration on the reverse of the invoice is

acceptable.

(d) The invoice declaration may be made on a separate sheet of
the invoice provided that the sheet is obviously part of the
invoice. A complementary form may not be used.

(e) An invoice declaration made out on a label which is
subsequently
acceptable
to the
provided there is no doubt that the label has been affixed
the exporter's stamp or
by the exporter. For example,
signature should cover both the label and the invoice.

attached

invoice

is

is necessary to consider whether

— whether the exporter is at all times in a position to supply
evidence of origin for the goods to be exported. In this
connection it
the
rules of origin and is in
exporter knows the current
possession of all
In the
case of producers,
the authorities must make sure that
the undertaking's stock accounts allow identification of
the origin of goods and, in the case of new undertakings,
that the system they have installed will permit such identi-
fication. For operators who are traders only, examination
should focus more specifically on their usual trade flows,

the documents proving origin.

— whether,

in the light of his past exporting record,

the
exporter offers sufficient guarantees concerning the orig-
inating status of the goods and the ability to meet all
resulting obligations.

Once an authorisation has been issued, exporters must:

— undertake to issue invoice declarations only for goods for
the necessary proof or accounting

which they hold all
elements at the time of issue,

12. ARTICLE 19 — VALUE BASIS FOR THE ISSUE AND
ACCEPTANCE OF INVOICE DECLARATIONS MADE OUT
BY ANY EXPORTER

The ex-works price may be used as the value basis for deciding
when an invoice declaration can be used instead of a
movement certificate EUR.1 in reference to the value limit
laid down in Article 19(1)(b). If the ex-works price is used as
the value basis, the importing country shall accept invoice
declarations made out by reference to that.

— assume full responsibility for the way the authorisation is
used, particularly for incorrect origin statements or other
misuse of the authorisation,

— assume responsibility for ensuring the person in the under-
taking responsible for completing invoice declarations
knows and understands the rules of origin,

25.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 228/9

— undertake to keep all documentary proofs of origin for a
period of at least three years from the date that
the
declaration was made,

alterations (e.g. the boxes describing the goods or stating
the number of packages, the country of destination or the
country of origin),

— undertake to produce proof of origin to the customs auth-
orities at any time, and allow inspections by those auth-
orities at any time.

— the time-limit on the movement certificate EUR.1 has
expired for reasons other than those covered by the regu-
lations (e.g. exceptional circumstances), except where the
goods were presented before expiry of the time-limit,

exporters. These

The customs authorities must carry out regular controls on
authorised
the
the authorisation and
continued compliance of
if possible, on
may be carried out at intervals determined,
the basis of risk analysis criteria.

controls must

the use of

ensure

The customs authorities must notify the European Commission
of the national numbering system used for designating auth-
orised exporters. The European Commission will then pass on
the information to the customs authorities of the EU Member
States.

14. ARTICLE 24 — IMPORTATION BY INSTALMENTS

An importer wishing to take advantage of the provisions of
this article must inform the exporter before the first instalment
is exported that a single proof of origin for the complete
product is required.

— the proof of origin is produced retrospectively for goods

that were initially imported fraudulently,

— box 4 on the movement certificate EUR.1 names a country

not party to the Agreement.

Action to be taken:

The proof of origin should be marked ‘INAPPLICABLE’ and
to which it was
retained by
presented in order to prevent any further attempt to use it.

authorities

customs

the

Where it is appropriate to do so, the Customs authorities of
the importing country shall inform the Customs authorities of
the country of exportation about the refusal without delay.

It is possible that each instalment is made up only of orig-
inating products. Where such instalments are accompanied by
proofs of origin those separate proofs of origin shall be
accepted by the customs authorities of the importing country
for the instalments concerned,
instead of a single proof of
origin issued for the complete product.

16. ARTICLE 32 — TIME-LIMITS FOR THE VERIFICATION OF

EVIDENCES OF ORIGIN

No country shall be obliged to answer a request for subsequent
verification, as provided for in Article 32, received more than
three years after the date of issue of a movement certificate
EUR.1 or the date of making out an invoice declaration.

15. ARTICLE 32 — REFUSAL OF PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT

WITHOUT VERIFICATION

This covers cases in which the proof of origin is considered
inapplicable, inter alia for the following reasons:

— the goods to which the movement certificate EUR.1 refers

are not eligible for preferential treatment,

17. ARTICLE 32 — REASONABLE DOUBT

The following cases, by way of example, come into this
category:

— the document has not been signed by the exporter (except
for declarations on the basis of invoices or commercial
documents drawn up by approved exporters where such
a possibility is provided for),

— the goods description box (box 8 on EUR.1) is not filled in

or refers to goods other than those presented,

— the movement certificate EUR.1 has not been signed or

dated by the issuing authority,

— the proof of origin has been issued by a country not party
to the Agreement even if the goods originate in a country
party to the Agreement (e.g. EUR.1 issued in Israel for
products originating in the ACP),

— the markings on the goods or packaging or the other
accompanying documents refer to an origin other than
that given on the movement certificate EUR.1,

— one of the mandatory boxes on the movement certificate
traces of non-authenticated erasures or

EUR.1 bears

— the particulars entered on the movement certificate EUR.1
show that there has been insufficient working to confer
origin,

C 228/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25.9.2002

— the stamp used to endorse the document does not match

19. EXPLANATORY NOTES FOR ARTICLES 16 AND 32

that which has been notified.

Action to be taken:

is sent

The document
to the issuing authorities for post-
clearance verification, with a statement of the reasons for the
request for verification. Pending the results of this verification,
all appropriate steps judged necessary by the customs auth-
orities shall be taken to secure payment of any applicable
duties.

18. ANNEX I — INTRODUCTORY NOTE 6, POINT 6(1)

The special rule for textile materials excludes linings and inter-
linings. The ‘pocketing fabric’ is a special woven fabric that is
the production of pockets and can
exclusively used for
therefore not be considered as normal
lining or interlining.
The special rule applies therefore to ‘pocketing fabric’. The
rule applies to woven fabrics in the piece as well as to
finished pockets originating in third countries.

DA

DE

EL

EN

ES

FI

FR

IT

NL

PT

SV

AFVIST DOKUMENT

UANVENDELIGT

DOKUMENT NICHT
ANGENOMMEN

NICHT ANWENDBAR

ΑΠΟΡΡΙΠΤΕΤΑΙ

ΜΗ ΑΠΟ∆ΕΚΤΟ

DOCUMENT NOT ACCEPTED

INAPPLICABLE

DOCUMENTO RECHAZADO

INAPLICABLE

ASIAKIRJA HYLÄTTY

EI VOIDA KÄYTTÄÄ

DOCUMENT REFUSÉ

INAPPLICABLE

DOCUMENTO RESPINTO

INAPPLICABILE

DOCUMENT GEWEIGERD

NIET VAN TOEPASSING

DOCUMENTO RECUSADO

NÃO APLICÁVEL

EJ GODTAGET DOKUMENT

OANVÄNDBART

Final report of the Hearing Officer in case COMP/36.264 — Mercedes, pursuant to Article 15 of
Commission Decision 2001/462/EC, ECSC of 23 May 2001 on the terms of reference of Hearing
Officers in certain competition proceedings (OJ L 162, 19.6.2001, p. 21)

(2002/C 228/03)

The draft Decision gives rise to the following obsevations regarding the right to be heard.

There were no procedural problems. The Statement of Objections was sent to the undertaking concerned,
DaimlerChrysler AG, on 31 March 1999. The undertaking replied by letter of 14 June 1999. The Oral
Hearing took place on 29 June 1999.

The rather long duration of the procedure is mainly due to the fact that the undertaking concerned was
afforded the opportunity of submitting several additional comments in writing after the Oral Hearing. On
7 December 1999 DaimlerChrysler AG presented a legal expert's report which analysed in detail the main
question of the case, namely the application of Article 81 to the distribution of motor vehicles via a
network of commercial agents. A further written submission from the undertaking was received by the
Commission on 4 September 2000 after the judgment of the Court of First Instance of the European
Communities in the Volkswagen AG case. The draft Decision to be submitted to the Advisory Committee
on restrictive practices and monopolies was drafted by mid-2001 after all of DaimlerChrysler AG's
submissions had been analysed.

It follows from the above observations that the rights of defence have been fully respected. The draft
Decision deals only with objections in respect of which DaimlerChrysler AG has been afforded the
opportunity of making known its views.

Done at Brussels on 4 September 2001.

Helmuth SCHRÖTER