Case C-654/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank van eerste aanleg Oost-Vlaanderen, afdeling Gent (Belgium) lodged on 19 October 2022 — FOD Volksgezondheid, Veiligheid van de voedselketen & Leefmilieu v Triferto Belgium NV
Date: 2022-10-19
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: chemical product, customs formalities, customs territory (EU), customs warehouse, import (EU)








C_2023035EN.01002901.xml










30.1.2023   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 35/29






Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank van eerste aanleg Oost-Vlaanderen, afdeling Gent (Belgium) lodged on 19 October 2022 — FOD Volksgezondheid, Veiligheid van de voedselketen & Leefmilieu v Triferto Belgium NV
(Case C-654/22)
(2023/C 35/35)
Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Rechtbank van eerste aanleg Oost-Vlaanderen, afdeling Gent

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: FOD Volksgezondheid, Veiligheid van de voedselketen & Leefmilieu

Defendant: Triferto Belgium NV

Questions referred







1.


Must Articles 6(1), 3(10) and 3(11) of the REACH Regulation (1) be interpreted as meaning that a registration obligation rests on the person who orders/purchases the substance from a non-EU manufacturer, even though all the arrangements for physically introducing the substance into the customs territory of the Union are in fact made by a third party who also expressly confirms being responsible for doing so?
In answering the foregoing question, is it relevant whether the quantity ordered/purchased forms only part (but exceeds 1 tonne) of a larger shipment of the same substance from the same non-EU manufacturer which is introduced into the customs territory of the Union by that third party to be stored in a bonded warehouse?










2.


Must Article 2(1)(b) of the REACH Regulation be interpreted as meaning that a substance which is stored in a bonded warehouse (by placing it under procedure J — code 71 00 in box 37 of the single administrative document) also remains outside the scope of the REACH Regulation until it is removed at a later stage and placed under a different customs procedure (e.g. release for free circulation)?
If so, must Articles 6(1) and 3(10) and 3(11) of the REACH Regulation be construed as meaning that, in that circumstance, the registration obligation rests on the person who has directly purchased the substance outside the Union and who calls for it (without having previously physically introduced the substance into the customs territory of the Union), even if the substance has already been registered by the third undertaking which previously physically introduced it into the customs territory of the Union?






(1)  Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, amending Directive 1999/45/EC and repealing Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 as well as Council Directive 76/769/EEC and Commission Directives 91/155/EEC, 93/67/EEC, 93/105/EC and 2000/21/EC (OJ 2006 L 396, p. 1).