CELEX: C2002/084/50
Language: en
Date: 2002-04-06 00:00:00
Title: Order of the Court (First Chamber) of 11 October 2001 in Case C-30/00 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo (Portugal)): William Hinton & Sons Lda v Fazenda Pública, intervener: Ministério Público (Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure Post-clearance recovery of import duties — Entry in the accounts of the import duties to be collected — Expiry of the time-limit for taking action for recovery — Article 254 of the Act of Accession of Spain and Portugal — Obligation incumbent on the Portuguese Republic to proceed, at its own costs, to the elimination of certain stocks of product)

C 84/30                   EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                           6.4.2002
1.    Declares that the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has failed to            1.    The application is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.
      fulfil its obligations under Article 1(a) of Council Directive
      75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste, as amended by                   2.    The parties shall bear their own costs.
      Council Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991, and
      Commission Decision 94/3/EC of 20 December 1993 estab-
      lishing a list of wastes pursuant to Article 1(a) of Directive       (1) OJ C 226 of 7.8.1999.
      75/442;
2.    Orders the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg to pay the costs.
(1) OJ C 200 of 14.7.2001.
                                                                                                ORDER OF THE COURT
                                                                                                      (First Chamber)
                                                                                                   of 11 October 2001
                      ORDER OF THE COURT                                   in Case C-30/00 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
                                                                           the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo (Portugal)): William
                                                                           Hinton & Sons Lda v Fazenda Pública, intervener: Minis-
                           (Sixth Chamber)                                                            tério Público (1)
                        of 27 November 2001                                (Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure Post-clearance
                                                                           recovery of import duties — Entry in the accounts of the
in Case C-208/99: Portuguese Republic v Commission of                      import duties to be collected — Expiry of the time-limit for
                  the European Communities (1)                             taking action for recovery — Article 254 of the Act of
                                                                           Accession of Spain and Portugal — Obligation incumbent
                                                                           on the Portuguese Republic to proceed, at its own costs, to
(EAGGF, Guidance Section — Decision of the Commission                                the elimination of certain stocks of product)
withdrawing financial assistance granted under Article 8
of Regulation (EEC) No 4256/88 — Action for partial
annulment against the designation of a Member State as                                                 (2002/C 84/50)
               recipient — Manifestly inadmissible)
                                                                                             (Language of the case: Portuguese)
                            (2002/C 84/49)
                                                                           (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                   (Language of the case: Portuguese)                                          in the European Court Reports)
(Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
                     in the European Court Reports)                        In Case C-30/00: reference to the Court under Article 234
                                                                           EC from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo (Supreme
                                                                           Administrative Tribunal) for a preliminary ruling in the
                                                                           proceedings pending before that court between William Hin-
In Case C-208/99: Portuguese Republic (Agents: L. Fernandes,               ton & Sons Lda and Fazenda Pública, intervener: Ministério
Â. Cortesão de Seiça Neves and P. Fragão) v Commission of               Público — on the interpretation of Articles 1, 2 and 5 of
the European Communities (Agents: A.M. Alves Vieira and                    Council Regulation (EEC) No 1697/79 of 24 July 1979 on the
P. Oliver) — application for partial annulment of C(1999)543,              post-clearance recovery of import duties or export duties
C(1999)544 and C(1999)545 of 4 March 1999 withdrawing                      which have not been required of the person liable for payment
the assistance granted to Belgravia Lda, Floreurop — Productos             on goods entered for a customs procedure involving the
Florestais Lda and Ordinal-Gestão de Investimentos Lda                    obligation to pay such duties (OJ 1979 L 197, p. 1), Article 254
respectively under the Guidance Section of the European                    of the 1985 Act concerning the conditions of accession and
Agriculture Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) — the                      the adjustments to the Treaties (OJ 1985 L 302, p. 23), Article 8
Court (Sixth Chamber), composed of: F. Macken, President,                  of Council Regulation (EEC) N3771/85 of 20 December 1985
N. Colneric, C. Gulmann, J.-P. Puissochet (Rapporteur) and                 on stocks of agricultural products in Portugal (OJ 1985 L 362,
V. Skouris, Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General; R. Grass,                p. 21) and Articles 4 and 8 of Commission Regulation (EEC)
Registrar, gave a judgment on 27 November 2001, the                        No 579/86 of 28 February 1986 laying down detailed rules
operative part of which is as follows:                                     relating to stocks of products in the sugar sector in Spain and
 ---pagebreak--- 6.4.2002                 EN                         Official Journal of the European Communities                                             C 84/31
Portugal on 1 March 1986 (OJ 1986 57, p. 21) — the Court                             —     the person liable has complied with all of the provisions
(First Chamber), composed of: P. Jann (Rapporteur), President                              laid down by the rules in force as far as concerns the
of the Chamber, L. Sevón and M. Wathelet, Judges; A. Tizzano,                             declaration of the event to which the collection of the levy
Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has made an order on                                in question relates.
11 October 2001, in which it has ruled:
                                                                               (1) OJ No C 122 of 29 April 2000.
1.    Article 1(2)(c) and the second subparagraph of Article 2(1) of
      Council Regulation (EEC) No 1697/79 of 24 July 1979 on
      the post-clearance recovery of import duties or export duties                                 ORDER OF THE COURT
      which have not been required of the person liable for payment
      on goods entered for a customs procedure involving the                                            (Second Chamber)
      obligation to pay such duties must be interpreted as meaning
      that entry in the accounts of the amount originally required of
                                                                                                        3 December 2001
      the person liable for payment is an official act which precedes
      notification regarding recovery and actual recovery and which
      does not necessarily consist in entry by the customs authority in        in Case C-59/00 (Reference for a preliminary ruling
      the accounts books, or any other medium used in their stead, of          from the Vestre Landsret): Bent Mousten Vestergaard v
      the amount in question.                                                                       Spøttrup Boligselskab (1)
                                                                               (Article 104(3) of the Rules of Procedure — Public works
                                                                               contracts — Contracts with a value below the threshold
2.    Article 2(2) of Regulation No 1697/79 must be interpreted as             values laid down in Directive 93/37/EEC — Clause requiring
      meaning that, where an initial act determining the amount of             the use of a product of a specified make, without any
      levies payable is annulled and replaced by a second act which,           possibility of using a similar product — Free movement of
      without altering the basis for recovery, fixes such levies in an                                          goods)
      amount lower than that which was initially decided, the action
      for recovery must be considered to have been set in motion by                                       (2002/C 84/51)
      the initial act.
                                                                                                   (Language of the case: Danish)
                                                                               (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be published
3.    Neither Article 254 of the Act of Accession nor the provisions of                            in the European Court Reports)
      Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3771/85 of 20 December
      1985 on stocks of agricultural products in Portugal nor of
      Commission Regulation (EEC) No 579/86 of 28 February                     In Case C-59/00: Reference to the Court under Article 234 EC
      1986 laying down detailed rules relating to stocks of products           by the Vestre Landsret (Denmark) for a preliminary ruling in
      in the sugar sector in Spain and Portugal preclude the                   the proceedings pending before that court between Bent
      Portuguese Republic from requiring of traders holding surplus            Mousten Vestergaard and Spøttrup Boligselskab, on the
      stocks of sugar which they should have been able to export               interpretation of Articles 6 and 30 of the EC Treaty (now, after
      within the period prescribed for that purpose to pay the levy            amendment, Articles 12 EC and 28 EC), the Court (Second
      provided for by Article 7(1) of Regulation No 579/86.                    Chamber) composed of: N. Colneric, President of the Chamber,
                                                                               R. Schintgen and V. Skouris (Rapporteur), Judges, Advocate
                                                                               General: P. Léger, Registrar: R. Grass, after informing the
                                                                               referring court of its intention to give its decision by reasoned
4.    The customs authorities of a Member State must refrain from              order in accordance with Article 104(3) of the Rules of
      carrying out post-clearance recovery of duties pursuant to               Procedure, after inviting the parties referred to in Article 20 of
      Article 5(2) of Regulation No 1697/79 where:                             the EC Statute of the Court of Justice to submit observations,
                                                                               has made an order on 3 December 2001, in which it has ruled:
                                                                               Article 30 of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article 28 EC)
      —      the duties have not been collected on account of an error         precludes a contracting authority from including in the contract
             of interpretation or application of the provisions on the         documents for a public works contract which does not exceed the
             levy in question in so far as it is the consequence of acts of    threshold laid down in Council Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June
             the competent authorities, which excludes errors caused by        1993 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of
             incorrect declarations by the person liable                       public works contracts a clause requiring the use in carrying out the
                                                                               contract of a product of a specified make, where that clause does not
                                                                               include the words ‘or equivalent’.
      —      the person liable acting in good faith could not reasonably       (1) OJ C 122 of 29.4.2000.
             have detected that error, despite his professional experience
             and the diligence shown by him