CELEX: 62014CN0040
Language: en
Date: 2014-01-27 00:00:00
Title: Case C-40/14: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 27 January 2014  — Directeur général des douanes et droits indirects, Chef de l’agence de poursuites de la Direction nationale du renseignement et des enquêtes douanières, Directeur régional des douanes et droits indirects de Lyon v Utopia SARL, operating under the business name Marshall Bioresources

7.4.2014   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 102/19
            
         Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 27 January 2014 — Directeur général des douanes et droits indirects, Chef de l’agence de poursuites de la Direction nationale du renseignement et des enquêtes douanières, Directeur régional des douanes et droits indirects de Lyon v Utopia SARL, operating under the business name Marshall Bioresources
   (Case C-40/14)
   2014/C 102/27
   Language of the case: French
   
      Referring court
   
   Cour de cassation
   
      Parties to the main proceedings
   
   
      Applicants: Directeur général des douanes et droits indirects, Chef de l’agence de poursuites de la Direction nationale du renseignement et des enquêtes douanières, Directeur régional des douanes et droits indirects de Lyon
   
      Defendant: Utopia SARL, operating under the business name Marshall Bioresources
   
      Questions referred
   
   
               1.
            
            
               Is an importer of animals specially prepared for laboratory use entitled to the relief from import duties provided for for goods of this type by Article 60 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 of 28 March 1983 setting up a Community system of reliefs from customs duty (1) when it is not itself a public establishment or an authorised private establishment which is principally engaged in education or scientific research, but its clients are establishments meeting those conditions?
            
         
               2.
            
            
               Must Rule 5(b) of the General Rules for the interpretation of the combined nomenclature be interpreted as meaning that cages used for transportation of live animals intended for laboratory research should be categorised as packing materials or packing containers for the purposes of that rule?
               If so, must the words ‘clearly suitable for repetitive use’ in relation to such packing materials or packing containers be assessed in general or only in respect of re-use within the Union?
            
         
      (1)  OJ L 1983 105, p. 1.