Case C-126/08: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Cassatie van België, lodged on 25 March 2008 — I. Distillerie Smeets Hasselt NV v 1. Belgische Staat, 2. L.S.C. De Vos, 3. Bollen, Mathay & Co. BVBA, liquidator of Transterminal Logistics NV, 4. D. Van den Langenbergh and 5. Firma De Vos NV; II. Belgische Staat v Bollen, Mathay & Co. BVBA, liquidator of Transterminal Logistics NV; and III. L.S.C. De Vos v Belgische Staat
Date: 2008-03-25
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: administrative formalities, customs debt, customs regulations, interpretation of the law

7.6.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 142/17

a preliminary ruling

from the Hof
Reference
for
van Cassatie van België,
lodged on 25 March 2008 —
I. Distillerie Smeets Hasselt NV v 1. Belgische Staat,
2. L.S.C. De Vos, 3. Bollen, Mathay & Co. BVBA, liquidator
of Transterminal Logistics NV, 4. D. Van den Langenbergh
and 5. Firma De Vos NV; II. Belgische Staat v Bollen,
Mathay & Co. BVBA, liquidator of Transterminal Logistics
NV; and III. L.S.C. De Vos v Belgische Staat

(Case C-126/08)

(2008/C 142/25)

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de
première instance de Liège (Court of First Instance, Liège)
(Belgium) lodged on 28 March 2008 — Jacques Damseaux
v État belge

(Case C-128/08)

(2008/C 142/26)

Language of the case: French

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

Hof van Cassatie van België

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants:

Tribunal de première instance de Liège

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Jacques Damseaux

Defendant: État belge

I. Distillerie Smeets Hasselt NV

Questions referred

II. Belgische Staat

III. L.S.C. De Vos

Respondents:

I. 1. Belgische Staat

2. L.S.C. De Vos

3. Bollen, Mathay & Co. BVBA, liquidator of Transterminal

Logistics NV

4. D. Van den Langenbergh

5. Firma De Vos NV

II Bollen, Mathay, & Co. BVBA,

liquidator of Transterminal

Logistics NV

III. Belgische Staat

Question referred

Should Articles 217(1) and 221(1) of the Community Customs
Code (CCC) (1) be construed as meaning that the prescribed
entry of a customs debt in the accounts may also be lawfully
effected through the entry of the amount in a record in accord-
ance with the AWDA (2), drawn up by investigating officials and
not by persons authorised to enter such amounts in the
accounts, and that such records may be treated as accounting
records or any other equivalent medium within the terms of
Article 217(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).

(2) Royal Decree of 18 July 1997 coordinating the general provisions on

customs and excise duties.

1.

‘Must Article 56 of the EC Treaty be interpreted as meaning
that
it prohibits a restriction, arising from the France-
Belgium Convention seeking to avoid double taxation and to
establish mutual administrative and legal rules of assistance
in the field of income tax, which allows partial double taxa-
tion of dividends from shares of companies established in
France to subsist and which renders the taxation of those
dividends more onerous than Belgian withholding tax alone
applied to dividends distributed by a Belgian company to a
Belgian resident shareholder?’

2.

‘Must Article 293 of the EC Treaty be interpreted as meaning
that it renders wrongful Belgium's inaction in not renego-
tiating with France a new way of abolishing double taxation
of dividends
from shares of companies established in
France?’

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank
van eerste aanleg Brugge (Belgium) lodged on 31 March
2008 — C. Cloet and J. Cloet v CVBA Westvlaamse
Intercommunale voor Economische Expansie, Huisvestings-
beleid en Technische Bijstand

(Case C-129/08)

(2008/C 142/27)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank van eerste aanleg Brugge