CELEX: C1998/278/27
Language: en
Date: 1998-09-05 00:00:00
Title: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale di Treviso by order of that court of 10 June 1998 in the case of Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato v. Fallimento Ditta Schiavon Silvano (Case C-230/98)

5.9.98                EN                 Official Journal of the European Communities                                 C 278/17
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunale di              multiplication coefficient used for setting the tax payable
Treviso by order of that court of 10 June 1998 in the case          for each band of vehicular fiscal horsepower increases
of Amministrazione delle Finanze dello Stato v. Fallimento          unevenly, without reference to any objective criteria, so
                    Ditta Schiavon Silvano                          that the rise in tax is clearly linear up to the 18 CV tax
                       (Case C-230/98)                              band but then becomes sharply exponential from the
                                                                    19 CV band, this being the first band in which there is no
                         (98/C 278/27)                              vehicle of domestic manufacture?
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
European Communities by an order of the Tribunale di
Treviso (District Court, Treviso), which was received at
the Court Registry on 30 June 1998, for a preliminary
ruling in the case of Amministrazione delle Finanze dello           Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanz-
Stato (State Finance Administration) v. Receiver in                 hof, by order of that court of 28 April 1998, in the case of
bankruptcy of the firm Schiavon Silvano, on the follwing            Hauptzollamt Neubrandenburg v. Lensing & Brockhausen
questions:                                                                                       GmbH
                                                                                           (Case C-233/98)
1. Whether Article 1 of Council Regulation (EEC)                                             (98/C 278/29)
    No 545/92 (1) must be regarded as immediately
    conferring upon Community citizens a subjective right
    to relief from duty and tax on imports, with the result         Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
    that, in the absence of any indication of the authority         European Communities by order of the Bundesfinanzhof
    empowered to issue certificates of origin in the case of        (Federal Finance Court) of 28 April 1998, received at the
    certain former Yugoslav Republics, that right                   Court Registry on 2 July 1998, for a preliminary ruling in
    continues to exist even where a certificate has been            the case of Hauptzollamt Neubrandenburg v. Lensing &
    issued by the body previously authorised, until such            Brockhausen GmbH on the following questions:
    time as the new body is designated;
                                                                    1. Is the first subparagraph of Article 36(3) of Council
2. Whether, on the contrary, the list in Annex I to                     Regulation (EEC) No 222/77 (1) in conjunction with
    Commission Regulation (EEC) No 859/92 (2) is                        Article 11a(2) of Commission Regulation (EEC)
    exhaustive and deprives the Savezni Trzisni                         No 1062/87 (2) to be interpreted as meaning that, in
    Inspektorat of any authority to issue certificates.                 the event of a failure to produce a consignment at the
                                                                        office of destination, the Member State of departure
(1) OJ L 63, 7.3.1992, p. 1.                                            has jurisdiction to levy import taxes only where the
(2) OJ L 89, 4.4.1992, p. 26.                                           period of three months laid down in the second
                                                                        subparagraph of Article 11a(2) of Regulation (EEC)
                                                                        No 1062/87 has previously been set for the principal
                                                                        and he has not furnished the proof required by that
                                                                        provision?
References for a preliminary ruling by the Tribunal de              2. If question 1 is to be answered in the affirmative: Is
Grande Instance d'Epinal by judgments of that court of                  the third subparagraph of Article 36(3) of Regulation
25 June 1998 in the cases of Lomboley SA and Mr ReneÂ                   (EEC) No 222/77 to be interpreted as meaning that it
  Bouctot respectively against l'Administration des Impôts              is to be applied also in a case in which a customs
               (Cases C-231/98 and C-232/98)                            office of the Member State of departure has levied
                                                                        taxes due in respect of goods cleared for the transit
                         (98/C 278/28)                                  procedure but has not set a time limit in accordance
                                                                        with the second subparagraph of Article 11a(2) of
                                                                        Regulation (EEC) No 1062/87, the result being that
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the                  the Member State of departure may refund the taxes
European Communities by judgments of the Tribunal de                    which it has assessed and levied without jurisdiction
Grande Instance d'Epinal (Regional Court, Epinal), of                   only where it is proved that the Member State in
25 June 1998, received at the Court Registry on 2 July                  which the offence or irregularity actually took place
1998, for a preliminary ruling in the cases of Lamboley                 has levied the taxes? Is a distinction to be drawn
SA and Mr ReneÂ Bouctot respectively against                            between taxes levied as own resources of the
l'Administration des Impôts (the Tax Authority) on the                  Community and other (national) taxes?
following question:
                                                                    (1) OJ L 38, 9.2.1977, p. 1.
                                                                    (2) OJ L 107, 22.4.1987, p. 1.
Is Article 95 of the EC Treaty to be interpreted as
precluding the application of legislation introducing a
system for taxing motor vehicles under which the