ACTUAL VERIFICATION , ALTHOUGH THE CONDITIONS DETERMINING ITS SUBSTANTIVE VALIDITY ARE SUBSEQUENTLY DISCOVERED NOT TO EXIST , THE CUSTOMS AUTHORITIES OUGHT NO LONGER TO BE BOUND TO EFFECT THE RELEASE PROVIDED FOR BY THAT PARAGRAPH .
11 ACCORDING TO THE ITALIAN AUTHORITIES , UNLESS THE CUSTOMS AUTHORITIES ARE TO BE OBLIGED TO CARRY OUT LENGTHY INQUIRIES AND TO NOTIFY THE GUARANTOR SYSTEMATICALLY OF THE NON-DISCHARGE OF THE T 1 DOCUMENT , CONTRARY TO THE OBJECTIVE AIMED AT BY THE ADOPTION OF REGULATION NO 1079/71 , THE DISCHARGE LATER DISCOVERED TO BE INVALID OUGHT NOT TO HAVE THE EFFECT OF RELEASING THE GUARANTOR AND THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 35 OF REGULATION NO 542/69 OUGHT IN THIS CASE TO BE INAPPLICABLE .
12 WITH A VIEW TO SOLVING THAT PROBLEM , THE TRIBUNALE , MILAN , REFERRED TO THE COURT THE FOLLOWING QUESTION :
' ' WITH REGARD TO ARTICLE 35 OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 542/69 OF 18 MARCH 1969 , AS SUPPLEMENTED BY ARTICLE 1 OF REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 1079/71 OF 25 MAY 1971 , IS IT ALWAYS INCUMBENT ON THE AMMINISTRAZIONE FINANZARIA ( FINANCE ADMINISTRATION ) TO INTIMATE , WITHIN TWELVE MONTHS OF THE DATE OF REGISTRATION OF A T 1 DECLARATION , THE NON-DISCHARGE OF THAT DOCUMENT , IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THE GUARANTEE REFERRED TO IN THOSE PROVISIONS?
' '
13 ARTICLE 35 OF REGULATION NO 542/69 OF THE COUNCIL , AS SUPPLEMENTED BY REGULATION NO 1079/71 OF THE COUNCIL , SEEKS TO ENSURE CERTAINTY IN THE LAW FOR PERSONS WHO ACT AS GUARANTORS FOR TRANSIT OPERATIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE REGULATION IN QUESTION , IN PARTICULAR BY PROVIDING FOR THEIR RELEASE FROM THEIR OBLIGATION UPON THE EXPIRY OF A PERIOD OF TWELVE MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF REGISTRATION OF THE COMMUNITY TRANSIT DECLARATION , WHERE THEY HAVE NOT BEEN NOTIFIED BY THE OFFICE OF DEPARTURE OF THE NON-DISCHARGE OF THE T 1 DOCUMENT . SUCH RELEASE , LINKED WITH EXPIRY OF THAT PERIOD , LIKE THE RELEASE AS A RESULT OF NOTICE OF DISCHARGE , IS NOT SUBJECT TO ANY OTHER CONDITION .
14 IN ADDITION , IT IS CLEAR FROM THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 35 OF REGULATION NO 542/69 , AS SUPPLEMENTED BY REGULATION NO 1079/71 OF THE COUNCIL , THAT WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE FUNCTION ASSIGNED TO IT IN THE PROCEDURE SET OUT IN ARTICLE 35 OF REGULATION NO 542/69 , NOTIFICATION OF DISCHARGE CAN NEITHER PREVENT THE GUARANTOR ' S RELEASE NOR TAKE THE PLACE OF NOTIFICATION OF NON-DISCHARGE OF THE T 1 DOCUMENT AND THUS HAVE AN EFFECT CONTRARY TO THAT EXPRESSLY ATTACHED TO THAT FORMALITY BY THE PROVISION IN QUESTION .
15 WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE EFFECTS WHICH FRAUD ON THE PART OF THE GUARANTOR HIMSELF MIGHT HAVE HAD ON HIS RELEASE FROM HIS OBLIGATIONS AS GUARANTOR , A SITUATION WHICH DOES NOT EMERGE FROM THE QUESTION PUT TO THE COURT , IT THEREFORE FOLLOWS THAT THE GUARANTOR IS AUTOMATICALLY RELEASED UPON THE