Case C-173/15: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf (Germany) lodged on 17 April 2015 — GE Healthcare GmbH v Hauptzollamt Düsseldorf
Date: 2015-04-17
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: business name, customs duties, customs union, customs valuation, export (EU), import (EU), patents licence, trade mark








C_2015236EN.01002301.xml










20.7.2015   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 236/23





Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf (Germany) lodged on 17 April 2015 — GE Healthcare GmbH v Hauptzollamt Düsseldorf
(Case C-173/15)
(2015/C 236/32)
Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: GE Healthcare GmbH

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Düsseldorf

Questions referred







1.


Can royalties or licence fees within the meaning of Article 32(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 (1) establishing the Community Customs Code (‘the Code’) be included in the customs value even though it is not established either at the time the contract is concluded or at the relevant date as regards the incurring of the customs debt (the latter date being determined in the event of any dispute in accordance with Articles 201(2) and 214(1) of the Code) that royalties or licence fees have become chargeable?










2.


If the reply to question 1 is in the affirmative: can royalties or licence fees for trade marks within the meaning of Article 32(1)(c) of the Code relate to the imported goods notwithstanding the fact that those royalties or licence fees are also paid for services and for the use of the key part of the name of the common group of companies?










3.


If the reply to question 2 is in the affirmative: can royalties or licence fees for trade marks within the meaning of Article 32(1)(c) of the Code be a condition of the sale for export to the Community of the imported goods within the meaning of Article 32(5)(b) of the Code even though payment was demanded by an undertaking related to the seller and to the buyer, and was made?










4.


If the reply to question 3 is in the affirmative and the royalties or licence fees relate, as here, partly to the imported goods and partly to post-importation services: does it follow from the appropriate apportionment made only on the basis of objective and quantifiable data, in accordance with Article 158(3) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 (2) of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (‘the Implementing Regulation’) and the interpretative note on Article 32(2) of the Code in Annex 23 to the Implementing Regulation, that only a customs value in accordance with Article 29 of the Code may be corrected, or, if a customs value cannot be determined in accordance with Article 29 of the Code, is the apportionment laid down in Article 158(3) of the Implementing Regulation also possible, in so far as those costs would not otherwise be taken into account, when determining a customs value to be established in accordance with Article 31 of the Code?






(1)  OJ 1992 L 302, p. 1.

(2)  OJ 1993 L 253, p. 1.