CELEX: C2000/355/28
Language: en
Date: 2000-12-09 00:00:00
Title: Case C-379/00: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the VAT and Duties Tribunal, London, by decision of that court of 24 March 2000, in the case of Overland Footwear Ltd (formerly Overland Shoes Ltd) against the Commissioners of Customs and Excise

C 355/14               EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                    9.12.2000
Action brought on 13 October 2000 by the Commission                     —    Infringement of the letter and the purpose of Decision
of the European Communities against the European                             1999/468/EC: The choice of the regulatory procedure for
    Parliament and the Council of the European Union                         the implementation of the LIFE programme goes against
                                                                             the objective of clarifying comitology procedures
                                                                             expressly referred to in Decision 1999/468/EC.
                         (Case C-378/00)
                                                                        (1) OJ 2000 L 192, p. 1.
                         (2000/C 355/27)                                (2) OJ 1999 L 184, p. 23.
An action against the European Parliament and the Council of
the European Union was brought before the Court of Justice
of the European Communities on 13 October 2000 by the
Commission of the European Communities, represented by
Dominique Maidani, of its Legal Service, acting as Agent, with
an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Carlos            Reference for a preliminary ruling by the VAT and Duties
Gómez de la Cruz, of the same service, Wagner Centre,                  Tribunal, London, by decision of that court of 24 March
Kirchberg.                                                              2000, in the case of Overland Footwear Ltd (formerly
                                                                        Overland Shoes Ltd) against the Commissioners of Cus-
                                                                                                 toms and Excise
The Commission of the European Communities claims that
the Court should:
                                                                                                 (Case C-379/00)
1.    annul Regulation (EC) No 1655/2000 of the European
                                                                                                 (2000/C 355/28)
      Parliament and of the Council of 17 July 2000 concerning
      the Financial Instrument for the Environment (LIFE) (1) in
      so far as it makes adoption of the measures implementing          Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
      the LIFE programme subject to the regulatory procedure            European Communities by a decision of the VAT and Duties
      contained in Article 5 of Council Decision 1999/468/EC            Tribunal, London, of 24 March 2000, which was received at
      of 28 June 1999 (2);                                              the Court Registry on 16 October 2000, for a preliminary
                                                                        ruling in the case of Overland Footwear Ltd (formerly Overland
                                                                        Shoes Ltd) against the Commissioners of Customs and Excise,
2.    maintain the effects of the above-mentioned regulation            on the following questions:
      until its amendment, to take place as soon as possible
      after the Court’s judgment;
                                                                        On the basis of the Council Regulation 2913/92 (1) (‘the
                                                                        Customs Code’), in particular Articles 29, 32 and 33 thereof,
3.    order the defendants to pay the costs.                            and the case law of the Court, where, at the time of customs
                                                                        clearance, an importer inadvertently declares as the price paid
                                                                        or payable for the goods an amount inclusive of buying
                                                                        commission and inadvertently fails to show the buying
Pleas in law and main arguments                                         commission separately on the import declaration from the
                                                                        price actually paid or payable but, after the goods have been
—     Infringement of Article 2 of Directive 1999/468/EC: By            released into free circulation, shows to the satisfaction of the
      providing that programmes with substantial budgetary              Customs authorities that the declared price paid or payable for
      implications should be subject to the management pro-             the goods included bona fide buying commission, which could
      cedure, Article 2(a) is obviously intended to make the            have been properly deducted at importation, and makes a
      implementation of all those programmes subject to that            claim for repayment of the duty paid on the buying com-
      procedure. In this case, the executive measures to be             mission within three years of the date on which amount of
      taken under Regulation 1655/2000 are management                   customs duty was communicated:
      measures. The task in question is to establish, on the basis
      of proposals for projects sent by the Member States, the          1.   Could the bona fide buying commission be dutiable as
      list of projects eligible for financing, after checking                part of the price actually paid or payable for the goods
      compliance with all the conditions and criteria set out in             under Article 29 of the Customs Code?
      the basic regulation. It is also a question of establishing
      guidelines strictly linked to the management of the LIFE          2.   If the answer to question 1 is negative, could the bona
      programme, in accordance with Article 4(4) of the                      fide buying commission be deductible from the declared
      regulation.                                                            transaction value bearing in mind the provisions of
                                                                             Articles 32.3 and 33 of the Customs Code?
      If Article 2(a) of Decision 1999/468/EC is not to be              3.   In such circumstances are the customs authorities obliged
      deprived of all purpose, only specific grounds may justify             under the Customs Code, and in particular Article 78.3
      the legislature derogating in a particular case from the               thereof, to accept the amendment to the price paid or
      procedure laid down, indicating the grounds which led it               payable for the imported goods and thereby reduced
      to use a different procedure from that prescribed.                     customs value?
 ---pagebreak--- 9.12.2000              EN                    Official Journal of the European Communities                                        C 355/15
4.    Is the importer therefor entitled under the Customs Code,         Does Community law, in particular Council Directive
      and in particular Article 236 thereof, to a refund of the         92/96/EEC of 10 November 1992 (1), preclude national legis-
      duty paid on the buying commission?                               lation which provides that a life-assurance proposal or, in the
                                                                        absence of a proposal, a life-assurance policy must inform a
                                                                        policy-holder that termination, reduction or redemption of an
(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992
                                                                        existing life-assurance contract for the purpose of subscribing
    establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ L 302,
    19.10.1992, p. 1).                                                  to a separate life-assurance contract will generally be detrimen-
                                                                        tal to that policy-holder?
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Juzgado de lo
                                                                        (1) Council Directive 92/96/EEC of 10 November 1992 on the
Social no 1, Pontevedra, by order of that court of                          coordination of laws, regulations and administrative provisions
28 September 2000 in the case of Marı́a Gardenia Abal                       relating to direct life assurance and amending Directives
Pombo against Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social                     79/267/EEC and 90/619/EEC (third life assurance Directive) (OJ
        and Tesorerı́a General de la Seguridad Social                       1992 L 360, p. 1).
                         (Case C-382/00)
                        (2000/C 355/29)
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by order of the Juzgado de lo Social               Action brought on 23 October 2000 by the European
(Social Court) no 1, Pontevedra, Spain, of 28 September 2000,              Parliament against the Council of the European Union
received at the Court Registry on 18 October 2000, for a
preliminary ruling in the case of Marı́a Gardenia Abal Pombo
against Instituto Nacional de la Seguridad Social (National                                      (Case C-387/00)
Social Security Institute) and Tesorerı́a General de la Seguridad
Social (General Social Security Fund) on the following question:
                                                                                                 (2000/C 355/31)
Where, in order for a worker (male or female) who is part of a
family in which other family members are working to be
insured under a special social security scheme for agricultural         An action against the Council of the European Union was
workers, a rule imposes a requirement that the income earned            brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communi-
from the activity to which the scheme applies must be the               ties on 23 October 2000 by the European Parliament,
family’s main income, in the sense of being the highest income,         represented by Ricardo Passos, Head of Division, and Antonio
is the rule contrary to the provisions of Council Directive             Caiola, of its Legal Service, acting as Agents, with an address
79/7/EEC of 19 December 1978(1)?                                        for service in Luxembourg at the Post and Registration
                                                                        Department, Bâtiment Tour — Office 017.
(1) OJ L 6, 10.1.1979, p. 24.
                                                                        The European Parliament claims that the Court should:
                                                                        —     Annul, pursuant to Article 230 EC:
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Cour d’Appel                        —     Council Decision 2000/527/EC of 14 August 2000
de Bruxelles (Ninth Chamber) by judgment of 17 October                              amending Decision 93/731/EC on public access to
2000 in the case of Axa Royale Belge v Georges Ochoa                                Council documents and Council Decision
                   and Stratégie Finance Sprl                                       2000/23/EC on the improvement of information on
                                                                                    the Council’s legislative activities and the public
                         (Case C-386/00)                                            register of Council documents(1);
                        (2000/C 355/30)                                       —     Decision 2000/C239/01 of the Secretary-General of
                                                                                    the Council/High Representative for the Common
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                              Foreign and Security Policy of 27 July 2000 on
European Communities by judgment of 17 October 2000 by                              measures for the protection of classified information
the Cour d’Appel de Bruxelles (Brussels Court of Appeal)                            applicable to the General Secretariat of the
(Ninth Chamber), which was received at the Court Registry on                        Council(2), and
23 October 2000, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Axa
Royale Belge v Georges Ochoa and Stratégie Finance Sprl on
the following question:                                                 —     Order the defendant to pay the costs.