85% OR MORE BY WEIGHT OF COTTON :
I . OF A WIDTH OF LESS THAN 85 CM . . . ' '
4 THE PLAINTIFF LODGED AN OBJECTION AGAINST THAT CUSTOMS TARIFF OPINION ON THE GROUND THAT THE PRODUCT WAS PUT UP IN RETAIL PACKINGS FOR MEDICAL OR SURGICAL PURPOSES AND THEREFORE FELL WITHIN HEADING NO 30.04 OF THE COMMON CUSTOMS TARIFF .
5 THE OBERFINANZDIREKTION REJECTED THAT OBJECTION ON THE GROUND THAT , ALTHOUGH THE PACKAGING AND LABELLING OF THE GAUZE FULFILLED THE CONDITIONS FOR GOODS PUT UP IN RETAIL PACKINGS , IT COULD NOT BE REGARDED AS PUT UP IN RETAIL PACKINGS FOR MEDICAL OR SURGICAL PURPOSES BECAUSE THE DIMENSIONS OF EACH PIECE , WHICH WERE 40 METRES LONG AND 80 CENTIMETRES WIDE WERE NOT NORMAL FOR RETAIL PACKINGS . IN SUPPORT OF THAT VIEW , THE OBERFINANZDIREKTION RELIED UPON COMMISSION REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 2282/79 OF 17 OCTOBER 1979 ON THE CLASSIFICATION OF GOODS UNDER SUBHEADING 55.09 A I OF THE COMMON CUSTOMS TARIFF ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL 1979 , L 262 , P . 23 ).
6 THE PLAINTIFF BROUGHT AN ACTION AGAINST THAT DECISION BEFORE THE BUNDESFINANZHOF CLAIMING THAT THE GAUZE IN QUESTION IS SOLD ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY TO HOSPITALS IN THE PACKING IN WHICH IT IS MADE UP ON ITS MANUFACTURE IN YUGOSLAVIA AND IS THEREFORE PUT UP IN RETAIL PACKINGS FOR MEDICAL OR SURGICAL PURPOSES WITHIN THE MEANING OF HEADING NO 30.04 . IN ITS VIEW , IT FOLLOWS FROM THE EXPLANATORY NOTES TO THE CUSTOMS COOPERATION COUNCIL NOMENCLATURE ON HEADING NO 30.04 THAT SALE DIRECTLY TO HOSPITALS ALSO QUALIFIES AS RETAIL SALE .
7 THE PLAINTIFF DISPUTES BOTH THE RELEVANCE AND THE VALIDITY OF REGULATION NO 2282/79 . IT CONSIDERS THAT SINCE THAT REGULATION EXPRESSLY CONCERNS ONLY PIECES OF FABRIC 100 METRES LONG AND 0.65 METRES WIDE , IT IS NOT APPLICABLE EITHER DIRECTLY OR BY ANALOGY TO THE PRODUCT IN QUESTION . THE PLAINTIFF ALSO CLAIMS THAT THE REGULATION IS INVALID SINCE IT EXCEEDS THE AUTHORIZATION GRANTED TO THE COMMISSION BY REGULATION ( EEC ) NO 97/69 OF THE COUNCIL OF 16 JANUARY 1969 ON MEASURES TO BE TAKEN FOR UNIFORM APPLICATION OF THE NOMENCLATURE OF THE COMMON CUSTOMS TARIFF ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL , ENGLISH SPECIAL EDITION 1969 ( I ), P . 12 ), INASMUCH AS THE EFFECT OF THE CONTESTED REGULATION IS NOT MERELY TO INTERPRET BUT TO AMEND THE TARIFF HEADING IN QUESTION .
8 FOR ITS PART , THE BUNDESFINANZHOF CONSIDERS THAT , WERE IT NOT FOR REGULATION NO 2282/79 , THE GOODS IN QUESTION WOULD UNDOUBTEDLY COME WITHIN HEADING NO 30.04 PRECISELY BECAUSE THEY ARE PUT UP IN RETAIL PACKINGS . IN ITS OPINION , IT DOES NOT FOLLOW FROM THE TEXT OF THAT HEADING THAT THE DIMENSIONS OF THE GOODS ARE RELEVANT FOR CLASSIFICATION PURPOSES . HOWEVER , SINCE THE COMMISSION HAS LAID EMPHASIS ON THAT ASPECT IN REGULATION NO 2282/79 , THE BUNDESFINANZHOF CONSIDERS THAT THE INTERPRETATION OF THE TARIFF HEADING IN QUESTION IS