CELEX: C2000/149/15
Language: en
Date: 2000-05-27 00:00:00
Title: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 23 March 2000 in Joined Cases C-310/98 and C-406/98 (references for preliminary rulings from the Bundesfinanzhof): Hauptzollamt Neubrandenburg v Leszek Labis, trading as "Przedsiebiorstwo Transportowo-Handlowe Met-Trans" C-310/98), and Sagpol SC Transport Miedzynarodowy i Spedycja (C-406/98) (Free movement of goods — External transit transaction — Movement under cover of a TIR carnet — Offences or irregularities — Evidence of the place where the offence or irregularity was committed — Time-limit for producing evidence — Types of evidence admissible — Compensation procedure)

27.5.2000               EN                      Official Journal of the European Communities                                            C 149/9
                 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                                      JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                         (Third Chamber)                                                              (Fifth Chamber)
                                                                                                    of 23 March 2000
                         of 23 March 2000
                                                                           in Joined Cases C-310/98 and C-406/98 (references for
in Case C-246/98 (reference for a preliminary ruling from                  preliminary rulings from the Bundesfinanzhof): Hauptzol-
the Arrondissementsrechtbank te Arnhem): criminal pro-                     lamt Neubrandenburg v Leszek Labis, trading as ‘Przedsie-
ceedings against Berendse-Koenen M.G. en Berendse H.D.                     biorstwo Transportowo-Handlowe “Met-Trans”’ C-310/
                            Maatschap (1)                                  98), and Sagpol SC Transport Miedzynarodowy i Spedycja
                                                                                                        (C-406/98) (1)
(Directive 83/189/EEC — Prohibition on growth promoters
                                                                           (Free movement of goods — External transit transaction —
             — Measures having equivalent effect)
                                                                           Movement under cover of a TIR carnet — Offences or
                                                                           irregularities — Evidence of the place where the offence or
                                                                           irregularity was committed — Time-limit for producing
                          (2000/C 149/14)                                  evidence — Types of evidence admissible — Compensation
                                                                                                         procedure)
                    (Language of the case: Dutch)                                                     (2000/C 149/15)
                                                                                              (Language of the case: German)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                   in the European Court Reports)
                                                                           (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
In Case C-246/98: Reference to the Court under Article 177 of                                  in the European Court Reports)
the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) by the Arrondissements-
rechtbank te Arnhem, Netherlands, for a preliminary ruling in
the criminal proceedings before that court against Berendse-               In Joined Cases C-310/98 and C-406/98: Hauptzollamt Neu-
Koenen M.G. en Berendse H.D. Maatschap, on the interpret-                  brandenburg and Leszek Labis, trading as ‘Przedsiebiorstwo
ation of Council Directive 83/189/EEC of 28 March 1983                     Transportowo-Handlowe “Met-Trans”’ (C-310/98), and Sagpol
laying down a procedure for the provision of information in                SC Transport Miedzynarodowy i Spedycja (C-406/98) —
the field of technical standards and regulations (OJ 1983                  Reference for a preliminary ruling under Article 177 of the EC
L 109, p. 8), as amended by Council Directive 88/182/EEC of                Treaty (now Article 234 EC), by the Bundesfinanzhof, Ger-
22 March 1988 (OJ 1988 L 81, p. 75), and Articles 30 and                   many, in proceedings before that court on the interpretation
36 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Articles 28 EC                  of Articles 454 and 455 of Commission Regulation (EEC)
and 30 EC) — the Court (Third Chamber), composed of:                       No 2454/93, of 2 July 1993, laying down provisions for the
J.C. Moitinho de Almeida, President of the Chamber, C. Gul-                implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92
mann (Rapporteur) and J.-P. Puissochet, Judges; P. Léger,                  establishing the Community customs code (OJ 1993 L 253,
Advocate General; H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the              p. 1) — the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: L. Sevón,
Registrar, has given a judgment on 23 March 2000, in which                 President of the Chamber acting as President of the Fifth
it has ruled:                                                              Chamber, P.J.G. Kapteyn, P. Jann (Rapporteur), H. Ragnemalm
                                                                           and M. Wathelet, Judges; J. Mischo, Advocate General;
                                                                           H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, has given
                                                                           a judgment on 23 March 2000, the operative part of which
Article 30 of the EC Treaty (now Article 28 EC) does not preclude a        provides as follows:
national rule such as that laid down by Article 3(1) of the
Verordening Stoffen met sympathico mimetische werking (PVV)
1991, read in conjunction with Article 2 thereof.                          1. The first paragraph of Article 454(3) of Commission Regulation
                                                                               (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for
                                                                               the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92
                                                                               establishing the Community customs code must be interpreted as
(1) OJ C 278 of 5.9.1998.                                                      meaning that the evidence as to where an offence or irregularity
                                                                               was committed required by the customs authorities of the Member
                                                                               State where that offence or irregularity was discovered need not
                                                                               consist only of written documents establishing that the competent
                                                                               authorities of another Member State have made a finding that
                                                                               the offence or irregularity was committed in their country.
 ---pagebreak--- C 149/10                  EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                            27.5.2000
2. The third and fourth paragraphs of Article 454(3) of Regulation          Hubeau, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar, gave a
     No 2454/93 must be interpreted as meaning that the compen-             judgment on 23 March 2000, in which it:
     sation mechanism established by that article also applies where
     the duties and other charges have been levied by the Member            1. Declares that, by failing to adopt within the period prescribed the
     State where the offence was discovered, even though it has been             laws, regulations and administrative measures necessary to
     satisfactorily proved that the offence was actually committed in            comply with Articles 9 to 12 of Council Directive 93/15/EEC
     another Member State.                                                       of 5 April 1993 on the harmonisation of the provisions relating
                                                                                 to the placing on the market and supervision of explosives for
3. The first paragraph of Article 454(3) and Article 455(1) of                   civil uses, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations
     Regulation No 2454/93 must be interpreted as meaning that                   under that Directive;
     the customs authorities of the Member State where the offence or
     irregularity was discovered cannot impose on the holder of the         2. Orders the French Republic to pay the costs.
     TIR carnet a time-limit of three months in which to provide
     satisfactory evidence as to where the offence or irregularity was      (1) OJ C 327 of 24.10.1998.
     actually committed. The time-limit under the first paragraph of
     Article 454(3) of Regulation No 2454/93 for producing
     evidence as to where the offence or irregularity was committed is
     one year.
(1) OJ C 312 of 10.10.1998 and OJ C 20 of 23.1.1999.
                                                                                               JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
                                                                                                      of 28 March 2000
                                                                            in Case C-158/97 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
                                                                            the Staatsgerichtshof des Landes Hessen): proceedings for
                                                                            a review of legality on an application by Georg Badeck
                   JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                                                 and Others (1)
                            (Fifth Chamber)                                 (Equal treatment of men and women — Employment in the
                                                                              administration — Measures for the promotion of women)
                           of 23 March 2000
                                                                                                        (2000/C 149/17)
in Case C-327/98: Commission of the European Communi-
                       ties v French Republic (1)                                                (Language of the case: German)
(Failure by a Member State to fulfil its obligations —                      (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                         Directive 93/15/EEC)                                                    in the European Court Reports)
                            (2000/C 149/16)                                 In Case C-158/97: Reference to the Court under Article 177 of
                                                                            the EC Treaty (now Article 234 EC) by the Staatsgerichtshof
                                                                            des Landes Hessen, Germany, for a preliminary ruling in the
                      (Language of the case: French)                        proceedings for a review of legality on an application by Georg
                                                                            Badeck and Others, interveners: Hessischer Ministerpräsident
                                                                            and Landesanwalt beim Staatsgerichtshof des Landes Hessen,
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published      on the interpretation of Article 2(1) and (4) of Council Directive
                     in the European Court Reports)                         76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of
                                                                            the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards
In Case C-327/98: Commission of the European Communities                    access to employment, vocational training and promotion,
(Agents: R. Wainwright and O. Couvert-Castéra) v French                     and working conditions (OJ 1976 L 39, p. 40) — the Court,
Republic (Agents: K. Rispal-Bellanger and D. Wibaux) —                      composed of: G.C. Rodrı́guez Iglesias, President, J.C. Moitinho
application for a declaration that, by failing to adopt within              de Almeida and R. Schintgen (Presidents of Chambers),
the period prescribed the laws, regulations and administrative              P.J.G. Kapteyn (Rapporteur), C. Gulmann, J.-P. Puissochet,
measures necessary to comply with Articles 9, 10, 11, 12 and                G. Hirsch, P. Jann and M. Wathelet, Judges; A. Saggio, Advocate
14 of Council Directive 93/15/EEC of 5 April 1993 on the                    General; H.A. Rühl, Principal Administrator, for the Registrar,
harmonisation of the provisions relating to the placing on the              has given a judgment on 28 March 2000, in which it has ruled:
market and supervision of explosives for civil uses (OJ 1993
L 121, p. 20), the French Republic has failed to fulfil its                 Article 2(1) and (4) of Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February
obligations under the EC Treaty — the Court (Fifth Chamber),                1976 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for
composed of: D.A.O. Edward, President of the Chamber,                       men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training
L. Sevón (Rapporteur), and C. Gulmann, J.-P. Puissochet and                and promotion, and working conditions does not preclude a national
P. Jann, Judges; A. Saggio, Advocate General; D. Louterman-                 rule which