CELEX: C1999/265/01
Language: en
Date: 1999-09-18 00:00:00
Title: Case C-248/99 P: Appeal brought on 2 July 1999 by the French Republic against the judgment delivered on 22 April 1999 by the Second Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in case T-112/97 between Monsanto Company and the Commission of the European Communities, supported by the French Republic

18.9.1999             EN                       Official Journal of the European Communities                                          C 265/1
                                                                       I
                                                                 (Information)
                                                    COURT OF JUSTICE
                                                             COURT OF JUSTICE
Appeal brought on 2 July 1999 by the French Republic                       decision for the same reasons as those relied on by the Court
against the judgment delivered on 22 April 1999 by the                     of First Instance in Lilly. It also refuses the assertion made by
Second Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the                       the Court of First Instance in paragraph 64 of the contested
European Communities in case T-112/97 (1) between Mon-                     judgment that in the absence of ‘anything in fact or law which
santo Company and the Commission of the European                           would permit a different conclusion, reference must be made
      Communities, supported by the French Republic                        to the grounds of its judgment in Lilly and the contested
                                                                           decision must, as a result, be annulled’.
                       (Case C-248/99 P)
                                                                           The French Government considers that the Court of First
                        (1999/C 265/01)                                    Instance had before it new elements of fact or law which were
                                                                           conducive to deciding the case differently from case T-120/96.
An appeal against the judgment delivered on 22 April 1999
by the Second Chamber of the Court of First Instance of the                (1) OJ C 199, 28.06.1997, p. 27.
European Communities in case T-112/97 between Monsanto
Company and the Commission of the European Communities,
supported by the French Republic, was brought before the
Court of Justice of the European Communities on 2 July 1999
by the French Republic, represented by Ronny Abraham,
Jean-François Dobelle, Kareen Rispal-Bellanger and Christina               Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Finanzgericht
Vasak, acting as agents, with an address for service in                    Bremen by order of 1 June 1999 in the case of Bacardi
Luxembourg at the French Embassy, 8, boulevard Joseph II.                              GmbH v Hauptzollamt Bremerhaven
The Appellant claims that the Court should:                                                         (Case C-253/99)
1. annul paragraph 1 of the operative part of the judgment                                         (1999/C 265/02)
     of the Court of First Instance dated 22 April in case
     T-112/97;                                                             Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
                                                                           European Communities by order of 1 June 1999 from the
2. grant the form of order sought by the defendant at first                Finanzgericht (Finance Court) Bremen, which was received at
     instance, namely dismissal on substantive grounds of                  the Court Registry on 7 July 1999, for a preliminary ruling in
     Monsanto’s application, and order the applicant to pay the            the case of Bacardi GmbH v Hauptzollamt Bremerhaven on
     costs.                                                                the following questions:
                                                                           1. Can import duties be repaid under Article 236 of the
Pleas in law and main arguments                                                Customs Code (1) in the case where the importer of
                                                                               Bourbon whiskey imported from the USA entered the
The Court of First Instance based its assessment of the                        Code Number 2208 30 82 in the customs declaration of
Monsanto action on the solution adopted in case T-120/96,                      10 September 1996, and only on 2 October 1996, on
Lilly v. Commission.                                                           submission of a certificate of authenticity corresponding
                                                                               to Annex 5 to the regulation implementing the Customs
The French Government disputes the Court of First Instance’s                   Code (2), applied for classification under Subheading 2208
statement that, in any event as far as it is concerned, the parties            30 11 of the Combined Nomenclature, which would result
considered that it was necessary to annul the Commission’s                     in application of a longer rate of customs duty?