CELEX: C1999/071/10
Language: en
Date: 1999-03-13 00:00:00
Title: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Appeal Commissioners, Dublin, by request of that court of 15 December 1998, in the case of Cabletron Systems Ltd against the Revenue Commissioners (Case C-463/98)

C 71/6                EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                   13.3.1999
    the facts found by it, that the applicant must be              (c) Is the Combined Nomenclature (Council Regulation
    deemed to have been given the possibility of effectively             2658/87 (1) (as amended)) to be interpreted as
    expressing its views on the envisaged reductions in                  requiring that those goods set out in the schedule
    assistance, in accordance with the judgment in                       attached hereto be classified as Automatic data
    Lisrestal v Commission'.                                             processing machines and units thereof; magnetic or
                                                                         optical readers, machines for transcribing data onto
                                                                         data media in coded form and machines for processing
                                                                         such data, not elsewhere specified or included . . .'
Ð Second, the applicant maintains, with regard to
                                                                         under tariff heading 8471 either (i) post 1 January
    sub-heading 14.3.1a (remuneration of the teaching
                                                                         1996, or (ii) between 28 April 1993 and 31 December
    staff) and sub-heading 14.3.13 (taxes and charges),
                                                                         1995, or (iii) for both periods of time?
    that it is clear from the documentary evidence in the
    file that the findings of fact made by the Court of First
    Instance in relation to those sub-headings are
    incorrect.                                                      (d) If the answer to any part of question (c) is in the
                                                                         negative in respect of one or more of the goods set out
                                                                         in the schedule attached hereto, is the Combined
Ð Third, the applicant maintains that the incorrectness                  Nomenclature to be interpreted as requiring that such
    of the findings of fact made by the Court of First                   goods to be classified, ante 1 January 1996, as
    Instance       concerning       sub-headings      14.3.1a            Electrical apparatus for line telephony or line
    (remuneration of the teaching staff) and sub-heading                 telegraphy, including such apparatus for carriercurrent
    14.3.13 (taxes and charges) led the Court of First                   line systems . . .' under tariff heading 8517 or, post
    Instance misapply the law to its case, in breach of the              1 January 1996, as Electrical apparatus for line
    principle of proportionality and to give contradictory               telephony or line telegraphy, including line telephone
    grounds for the judgment.                                            sets with cordless handsets and telecommunication
                                                                         apparatus for carriercurrent line systems or for digital
                                                                         line systems; video phones . . .' under tariff heading
                                                                         8517?
                                                                    (1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the
                                                                        tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common
                                                                        Customs Tariff (OJ L 256, 7.9.1987, p. 1).
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Appeal
Commissioners, Dublin, by request of that court of
15 December 1998, in the case of Cabletron Systems Ltd
             against the Revenue Commissioners
                       (Case C-463/98)
                        (1999/C 71/10)
                                                                    Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht
                                                                    für Zivilrechtssachen Wien, by order of that court of
                                                                    28 October 1998 in the case of Westdeutsche Landesbank
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the              Girozentrale against Friedrich Stefan, intervener: Republic
European Communities by a request of the Appeal                                                of Austria
Commissioners, Dublin, of 15 December 1998, which was
received at the Court Registry on 17 December 1998, for                                     (Case C-464/98)
a preliminary ruling in the case of Cabletron Systems Ltd                                    (1999/C 71/11)
against the Revenue Commissioners, on the following
questions:
                                                                    Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
(a) Is Commission Regulation (EC) No 1638/94 of 5 July              European Communities by order of the Landesgericht für
    1994 (OJ L 172, 7.7.1994, p. 5) concerning the                  Zivilrechtssachen Wien (Regional Civil Court, Vienna), of
    classification of certain goods in the Combined                 28 October 1998, received at the Court Registry on
    Nomenclature, valid insofar as it classifies under CN           18 December 1998, for a preliminary ruling in the case of
    Code 8517 82 90 the goods respectively described at             Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale against Friedrich
    items 1, 2 and 3 of the annex to the said Regulation?           Stefan, intervener: Republic of Austria, on the following
                                                                    questions:
(b) Is Commission Regulation (EC) No 1165/95 of 23 May
    1995 (OJ L 117, 24.5.1995, p. 15), concerning the               (a) Does a refusal to allow a mortgage to be created to
    classification of certain goods in the Combined                      cover an existing foreign-currency debt (in this case in
    Nomenclature, valid insofar as it classifies under CN                German marks (DM)) constitute a restriction on the
    Code 8517 82 90 the goods described at item 4 of the                 movement of capital and payments compatible with
    annex to the said Regulation?                                        Article 73b of the EC Treaty?'