CELEX: C2004/106/71
Language: en
Date: 2004-04-30 00:00:00
Title: Case C-140/04: Referencefor a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Beroep te Antwerpen, of 11 March2004 in proceedings between N.V. United Antwerp Maritime Agencies andthe Kingdom of Belgium and between N.V. Seaport Terminals and (1) the Kingdomof Belgium and (2) N.V. United Antwerp Maritime Agencies

30.4.2004   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 106/41
            
         Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van Beroep te Antwerpen, of 11 March 2004 in proceedings between N.V. United Antwerp Maritime Agencies and the Kingdom of Belgium and between N.V. Seaport Terminals and (1) the Kingdom of Belgium and (2) N.V. United Antwerp Maritime Agencies
   (Case C-140/04)
   (2004/C 106/71)
   The Hof van Beroep Antwerp te Antwerpen (Court of Appeal, Antwerp), on the basis of its decision of 11 March 2004, received at the Court’s Registry on 16 March 2004, in the proceedings pending before that court between N.V. United Antwerp Maritime Agencies and the Kingdom of Belgium and between N.V. Seaport Terminals and (1) the Kingdom of Belgium and (2) N.V. United Antwerp Maritime Agencies, refers to the Court of Justice for the European Communities for a preliminary ruling the following questions:
   
               1.
            
            
               May the person who must present the goods to customs (Article 40 of the Community Customs Code in Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1992 L 302, p.1)) be deemed to be the person required to fulfil the obligations arising from temporary storage of the goods (final indent of Article 203(3) of the Community Customs Code), in which connection he or his representative must lodge the summary declaration (Article 44(2) thereof) and must sign it (Article 183(1) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1993 L 253, p. 1)), and must make the goods available to the customs authorities for as long as they have not been released from the means of transport in which they are located when the goods are brought into the Community and until such time as those goods have received a custom designation?
            
         
               2.
            
            
               May the person required to fulfil the obligations arising from temporary storage of the goods (final indent of Article 203(3) of the Community Customs Code) be deemed to be the person who, after release of the goods, has them in his possession in order to move them or store them, in consequence of which, under Article 51(2) and 53(2) of the Community Customs Code, he is deemed to be the holder of the goods and is consequently required, under Article 184(2) of the implementing provisions, to re-present the goods at the request of the customs authorities?
            
         
               3.
            
            
               If the first and second questions are answered affirmatively, may the persons referred to in those questions consequently be deemed to be joint and several customs debtors, it being understood that the persons mentioned in the first and second questions are different persons (in this case the representative of the shipping line by which the goods were brought into the Community and the freight forwarder responsible for the storage and removal of the goods at the unloading place or quayside indicated by the customs authorities?
            
         
               4.
            
            
               If the third question is answered affirmatively does the person mentioned in the first question remain the debtor until the goods are given a customs designation, regardless of the fact that after release of the goods from the means of transport by which they entered the Community they were stored with or removed by the person mentioned in the second question?
            
         
               5.
            
            
               If the third question is answered in the negative must the person mentioned in the first question be regarded as remaining a customs debtor until the goods are received by the person mentioned in the second question and does the person mentioned in the second question become a debtor only from the time when he arranges the storage and removal of the goods?
            
         
               6.
            
            
               If the first question is answered affirmatively and the second question negatively must the person mentioned in the first question continue to be regarded as the debtor until the time when the goods are received by the person mentioned in the second question or until the time when the goods have been given a customs designation?