Case C-125/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie van België, lodged on 25 March 2008 — G.C. Deschaumes v Belgian State
Date: 2008-03-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU customs procedure, customs debt, customs regulations, interpretation of the law, limitation of legal proceedings

C 142/16

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

7.6.2008

(c) If the interpretation of the national provisions which is
described in Question 4(a) infringes Article 10 EC, are
the courts of the Member State before which such an
action for an injunction is pending under an obligation
to interpret domestic law in a way conforming with
Community law, so that the term ‘officially authorised
installation’ can cover both operation authorisations
granted by the domestic authorities and those granted by
the authorities of another Member State?

a preliminary ruling

from the Hof
for
Reference
van Cassatie van België,
lodged on 25 March 2008 —
I. G.A.L.M. Snauwaert and Algemeen Expeditiebedrijf
Zeebrugge BVBA v Belgian State; II. Coldstar NV v Belgian
State; III. D.P.W. Vlaeminck v Belgian State; IV. J.P. Den
Haerynck v Belgian State; and V. A.E.M. De Wintere v
Belgian State

(Case C-124/08)

(2008/C 142/23)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hof van Cassatie van België

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants:

I. 1. G.A.L.M. Snauwaert

2. Algemeen Expeditiebedrijf Zeebrugge BVBA, party incur-

ring civil liability

II. Coldstar NV, party incurring civil liability

III. D.P.W. Vlaeminck

IV. J.P. Den Haerynck

V. A.E.M. De Wintere

Respondent: Belgische Staat (Belgian State)

Questions referred

1. Should Article 221(1) of

the Community Customs Code
(CCC) (1) be construed as meaning that
the prescribed
communication of a customs debt to the person liable for
payment can be lawfully effected only after it has been
entered in the accounts or, in other words, that the commu-
nication of a customs debt to the person liable for payment
prescribed in Article 221(1) of the CCC should always be
preceded by its entry in the accounts if it is to be lawful and
to comply with Article 221(1)of the CCC?

1

by Article

of Regulation

2. Should Article 221(3) of
amendment

the CCC, as applicable before
its
(EC)
No 2700/2000 (2), be construed as meaning that the option
lawfully communicating the amount entered in the
of
accounts after the period of three years from the date on
which the customs debt was incurred,
if that debt is the
result of an act which is liable to give rise to criminal court
proceedings, is available to the customs authorities only in
respect of the person who is responsible for the act which is
liable to give rise to criminal court proceedings?

(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 estab-

lishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1992 L 302 p. 1).

(2) Regulation (EC) No 2700/2000 of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 16 November 2000 amending Regulation (EEC)
No 2913/92 (OJ 2000 L 311, p. 17).

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van
lodged on 25 March 2008 — G.C.
Cassatie van België,

Deschaumes v Belgian State

(Case C-125/08)

(2008/C 142/24)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hof van Cassatie van België

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: G. Deschaumes

Respondent: Belgian State

Question referred

Should Article 221(1) of
the Community Customs Code
(CCC) (1) be construed as meaning that the prescribed commu-
nication of a customs debt to the person liable for payment can
the customs debt has been
lawfully be effected only after
entered in the accounts or, in other words, that the communica-
tion of a customs debt to the person liable for payment, as
prescribed in Article 221(1) of
the CCC, must always be
preceded by its entry in the accounts if it is to be lawful and to
comply with Article 221(1)of the CCC?

(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 estab-

lishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1992 L 302, p. 1).