Case C-248/07: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 6 November 2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Antwerpen — Belgium) — Trespa International B.V. v Nova Haven- en Vervoerbedrijf N.V. (Regulation implementing the Community Customs Code — Articles 291 and 297 — Favourable tariff treatment — End-use — Concept of person importing the goods or having them imported for free circulation — Concept of transfer of goods within the Community — Concept of transferee )
Date: 2008-11-06
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: carriage of goods, customs regulations, import, interpretation of the law

20.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 327/3

Re:

Action for annulment — Council Decision 2006/1016/EC of
19 December 2006 granting a Community guarantee to the
European Investment Bank against losses under loans and loan
guarantees for projects outside the Community (OJ 2006 L 414,
p. 95) — Choice of legal basis — Article 181a EC — Decision
essentially concerning developing countries — Need to have
recourse to a dual legal basis — Articles 179 EC and 181a EC

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Annuls Council Decision 2006/1016/EC of 19 December 2006
granting a Community guarantee to the European Investment Bank
against losses under loans and loan guarantees for projects outside
the Community;

2. Orders that the effects of Decision 2006/1016 be maintained for
European Investment Bank financing arrangements entered into
before the entry into force, within a period of 12 months from the
date of delivery of this judgment, of a new decision adopted on the
appropriate legal basis, namely Articles 179 EC and 181a EC
together;

Other party to the proceedings: Commission of
the European
Communities (represented by: I. Zervas and D. Triantafyllou,
acting as Agents)

Re:

the Court of First
Appeal brought against the judgment of
Instance (First Chamber) of 17 January 2007 in Case T-231/04
Hellenic Republic v Commission of the European Communities, by
which the Court of First Instance dismissed as unfounded an
action for annulment of the Commission decision to proceed to
recovery by the offsetting of sums owed by Greece following its
participation in the Abuja I and II projects to create a common
diplomatic mission of the countries of the European Union in
Abuja (Nigeria)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

1. Dismisses the appeal.

2. Orders the Hellenic Republic to pay the costs.

3. Orders the Council of the European Union to pay the costs except

those of the Commission of the European Communities;

(1) OJ C 155, 7.7.2007.

4. Orders the Commission of the European Communities to bear its

own costs.

(1) OJ C 155, 7.7.2007.

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 6 November
2008 — Hellenic Republic v Commission of the European
Communities

(Case C-203/07 P) (1)

(Appeal — Project to set up a common diplomatic representa-
tion in Abuja (Nigeria) — Reimbursement of sums owed by
the Hellenic Republic — Offsetting against the amount to be
paid by the Commission under the Regional Operational
Programme for mainland Greece)

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 6 November
2008 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van
beroep te Antwerpen — Belgium) — Trespa International
B.V. v Nova Haven- en Vervoerbedrijf N.V.

(Case C-248/07) (1)

(Regulation implementing the Community Customs Code —
Articles 291 and 297 — Favourable tariff treatment — End-
use — Concept of ‘person importing the goods or having
them imported for free circulation’ — Concept of ‘transfer of
goods within the Community’ — Concept of ‘transferee’)

(2008/C 327/05)

Language of the case: Dutch

(2008/C 327/04)

Referring court

Language of the case: Greek

Hof van beroep te Antwerpen

Parties

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Trespa International B.V.

Appellant: Hellenic Republic (represented by: P. Mylonopoulos,
S. Trekli and Z. Stavridi, acting as Agents)

Defendant: Nova Haven- en Vervoerbedrijf N.V.

C 327/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

20.12.2008

Re:

Preliminary ruling — Hof van beroep te Antwerpen — Interpre-
tation of Articles 1a, 291 and 297 of Commission Regulation
(EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for
the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92
establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1993 L 253,
p. 1) — Concepts of ‘transfer of goods within the Community’,
‘person importing the goods or having them imported for free
circulation’ and ‘transferee’.

Operative part of the judgment

1. Article 291(1) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of
2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of
Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Com-
munity Customs Code, as amended by Commission Regulation
No 89/97 of 20 January 1997, must be interpreted as meaning
that the concept of ‘person importing the goods or having them
imported for free circulation’ contained therein refers to the person
for whom the goods are destined and who intends to assign them
to the prescribed end-use,
irrespective of whether he makes the
customs declaration himself or has that done by a representative
within the meaning of Article 5 of Council Regulation (EEC)
No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community
Customs Code. That concept does not refer to the representative of
that person before the customs authorities, disregarding those cases
in which that person is deemed to act in his own name and on his
own behalf pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 5(4) of
Regulation No 2913/92 and who must therefore be considered an
importer.

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 6 November
2008 (reference for
a preliminary ruling from the
Regeringsrätten — Sweden) — Kollektivavtalsstiftelsen
TRR Trygghetsrådet v Skatteverket

(Case C-291/07) (1)

(VAT — Place of taxable transactions — Place of supply for
tax purposes — Service supplier established in a Member
State other than that in which the customer is established —
Status of taxable person — Services supplied to a national
foundation carrying out both economic and non-economic
activities)

(2008/C 327/06)

Language of the case: Swedish

Referring court

Regeringsrätten

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Kollektivavtalsstiftelsen TRR Trygghetsrådet

Defendant: Skatteverket

Re:

2. Article 297(1) of Regulation No 2454/93, as amended by Regu-
lation No 89/97, must be interpreted as meaning that there has
been no transfer of goods within the Community in a situation
where goods are imported into Belgium then transported to the
Netherlands, if the person authorised acts on behalf of the ultimate
importer, which is for the national court to ascertain. The mere fact
that the goods were imported into and cleared through customs in
Belgium then transported to the Netherlands is irrelevant to the
establishment of the existence of a transfer within the meaning of
that provision. Where goods are transferred, the transferee must
hold an authorisation issued in accordance with Article 291 of
that regulation.

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Regeringsrätten — Inter-
pretation of Articles 9(2)(e) and 21(1)(b) of Sixth Council Direc-
tive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the
laws of
taxes —
the Member States relating to turnover
Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assess-
ment (OJ 1977 L 145, p. 1) and of Articles 56(1)(c) and 196 of
Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the
common system of value added tax (OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1) —
National foundation which carries out both economic and other
activities, using consultancy services supplied by a supplier
established in another Member State in the context of its activ-
ities which do not fall within the scope of application of the
Directive

3. Article 297(1) of Regulation No 2454/93, as amended by Regu-
lation No 89/97, must be interpreted as meaning that the concept
of ‘transferee’ contained therein does not refer to a customs agent
who carries out customs formalities on behalf of the importer.

(1) OJ C 170, 21.7.2007.

Operative part of the judgment

Article 9(2)(e) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May
1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating
to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform
basis of assessment, as amended by Council Directive 1999/59/EC of
17 June 1999,
of Council Directive
2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of
value added tax must be interpreted as meaning that where the
customer for consultancy services supplied by a taxable person estab-
lished in another Member State carries out both an economic activity

and Article 56(1)(c)