CELEX: 62018CN0655
Language: en
Date: 2018-10-19 00:00:00
Title: Case C-655/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad Varna (Bulgaria) lodged on 19 October 2018 — Mitnitsa Varna v Schenker EOOD

7.1.2019   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 4/17
            
         
      Request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad Varna (Bulgaria) lodged on 19 October 2018 — Mitnitsa Varna v Schenker EOOD
      (Case C-655/18)
      (2019/C 4/22)
      Language of the case: Bulgarian
      
         Referring court
      
      Administrativen sad Varna
      
         Parties to the main proceedings
      
      
         Appellant in cassation: Mitnitsa Varna
      
         Respondent in cassation: Schenker EOOD
      
         Questions referred
      
      
                  1.
               
               
                  Should Article 242(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union Customs Code be interpreted as meaning that, under the specific circumstances of the main proceedings, the theft of goods placed under a customs warehousing procedure constitutes a removal from the customs warehousing procedure that gives cause for the imposition of a financial penalty on the authorisation holder for an offence under customs legislation?
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Is the imposition of a charge equivalent to the value of the goods that were the subject of the customs offence (in this case removal from the customs warehousing procedure) an administrative penalty within the meaning of Article 42(1) and (2) of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union Customs Code, and is a national provision regulating such a payment, alongside the imposition of the financial penalty, permissible? Does such a rule meet the criteria of effectiveness, proportionality and dissuasiveness of penalties for failure to comply with the EU customs legislation laid down in the second sentence of Article 42(1) of the regulation?
               
            
         (1)  OJ 2013 L 269, p. 1.