Case C-509/22,  Girelli Alcool: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 18 April 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione – Italy) – Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli v Girelli Alcool Srl (Reference for a preliminary ruling – Taxation – Excise duties – Directive 2008/118/EC – Article 7(4) – Chargeability of excise duty – Release for consumption – Total destruction or irretrievable loss of a product placed under a duty-suspension arrangement – Concept of ‘unforeseeable circumstances’ – Authorisation by the competent authorities of the Member State – Irretrievable loss caused by a non-serious fault committed by an employee of the authorised warehousekeeper)
Date: 2024-04-18
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: damage, excise duty, free circulation, storage, tax exemption








C_202403420EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/3420


10.6.2024






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 18 April 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione – Italy) – Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli v Girelli Alcool Srl


(Case C-509/22,
                (1)
Girelli Alcool)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Excise duties - Directive 2008/118/EC - Article 7(4) - Chargeability of excise duty - Release for consumption - Total destruction or irretrievable loss of a product placed under a duty-suspension arrangement - Concept of ‘unforeseeable circumstances’ - Authorisation by the competent authorities of the Member State - Irretrievable loss caused by a non-serious fault committed by an employee of the authorised warehousekeeper)
(C/2024/3420)
Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Corte suprema di cassazione

Parties to the main proceedings


Appellant: Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli

Respondent: Girelli Alcool Srl

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 7(4) of Council Directive 2008/118/EC of 16 December 2008 concerning the general arrangements for excise duty and repealing Directive 92/12/EEC
must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of ‘unforeseeable circumstances’, within the meaning of that provision, must, like that of ‘
                     force majeure
                     ’, be understood as referring to abnormal and unforeseeable circumstances beyond the control of the party by whom it is pleaded, the consequences of which, in spite of the exercise of all due care, could not have been avoided.










2.


Article 7(4) of Directive 2008/118
must be interpreted as meaning that recognition of the existence of ‘unforeseeable circumstances’, within the meaning of that provision, requires, first, that the total destruction or irretrievable loss of the excise goods be caused by abnormal and unforeseeable circumstances that are beyond the control of the operator concerned, which is precluded where those circumstances come within the operator’s sphere of responsibility, and, second, that the operator must have exercised the care normally due in the context of its business in order to guard against the consequences of such an event.










3.


Article 7(4) of Directive 2008/118
must be interpreted as precluding a provision of a Member State’s national law which treats, in every case, acts constituting a non-serious fault which are attributable to the relevant person liable to excise duty in the same way as unforeseeable circumstances and force majeure. However, where the acts constituting a non-serious fault resulting in the total destruction or irretrievable loss of the excise goods were committed in the context of an alcohol denaturing operation which had received prior authorisation from the competent national authorities, it must be held that that destruction or loss occurred as a consequence of authorisation by the competent authorities of the Member State concerned, with the result that that destruction or loss must not be regarded as a release for consumption within the meaning of Article 7 of Directive 2008/118.










4.


Article 7(4) of Directive 2008/118
must be interpreted as meaning that the expression ‘as a consequence of authorisation by the competent authorities of the Member State’, in the first subparagraph of that provision, cannot be understood as allowing Member States to provide, generally, that the total destruction or irretrievable loss of excise goods placed under a duty suspension arrangement does not constitute a release for consumption where it is the result of a non-serious fault.






(1)  
            OJ C 389, 10.10.2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/3420/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)