CELEX: 62016CA0522
Language: en
Date: 2017-10-19 00:00:00
Title: Case C-522/16: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 19 October 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — A v Staatssecretaris van Finaciën (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Customs union and Common Customs Tariff — Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 — Second subparagraph of Article 201(3) and Article 221(3) and (4) — Regulation (EEC) No 2777/75 — Regulation (EC) No 1484/95 — Additional import duties — Artificial arrangement intended to avoid the additional duties due — Customs declaration based on false information — Persons capable of being held liable for the customs debt — Limitation period)

11.12.2017   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 424/11
            
         Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 19 October 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — A v Staatssecretaris van Finaciën
   (Case C-522/16) (1)
   
   ((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Customs union and Common Customs Tariff - Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 - Second subparagraph of Article 201(3) and Article 221(3) and (4) - Regulation (EEC) No 2777/75 - Regulation (EC) No 1484/95 - Additional import duties - Artificial arrangement intended to avoid the additional duties due - Customs declaration based on false information - Persons capable of being held liable for the customs debt - Limitation period))
   (2017/C 424/15)
   Language of the case: Dutch
   
      Referring court
   
   Hoge Raad der Nederlanden
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Applicant: A
   
      Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Finaciën
   
      Operative part of the judgment
   
   
               1.
            
            
               In circumstances such as those in the case in the main proceedings, the second subparagraph of Article 201(3) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2700/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2000 must be interpreted as meaning that documents that are required to be produced by Article 3(2) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1484/95 of 28 June 1995 laying down detailed rules for implementing the system of additional import duties and fixing representative prices in the poultrymeat and egg sectors and for egg albumin, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 163/67/EEC, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 684/1999 of 29 March 1999, constitute information required to draw up the customs declaration within the meaning of Article 201(3).
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Article 201(3) of Regulation No 2913/92, as amended by Regulation No 2700/2000, must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of a ‘debtor’ of the customs debt, within the meaning of that article, covers the natural person who has been closely and knowingly involved in the design and artificial construction of a structure of commercial transactions, such as that at issue in the case in the main proceedings, which had the effect of reducing the amount of the import duties legally owed, although that natural person has not himself communicated the false information which had served as the basis for drawing up the customs declaration, where it appears from the facts that that person had or ought reasonably to have known that the transactions concerned by that structure had been carried out not in the ordinary course of trade, but solely for the purpose of improperly benefiting from the advantages provided for by Union law. In that regard it is irrelevant that the person concerned designed and artificially constructed that structure only after he had obtained the guarantee of its lawfulness from customs experts.
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Article 221(4) of Regulation No 2913/92, as amended by Regulation 2700/2000, must be interpreted as meaning that the fact that, in circumstances such as those at issue in the case in the main proceedings, the customs debt on importation is incurred, in accordance with Article 201(1) thereof, through the release for free circulation of goods liable to import duties, is not such, in itself, as to exclude the possibility of communicating to the debtor the amount of import duties owed on such goods after the expiry of the period laid down in Article 221(3) of that regulation, as amended.
            
         
      (1)  OJ C 86, 20.3.2017.