CELEX: C1997/295/05
Language: en
Date: 1997-09-27 00:00:00
Title: JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Sixth Chamber) of 17 July 1997 in Joined Cases C-114/95 and C-115/95 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Østre Landsret): Texaco A/S v. Middelfart Havn and Others and Olieselskabet Danmark amba v. Trafikministeriet and Others (Maritime transport - Goods duty - Import surcharge)

C 295/4               EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                     27 . 9 . 97
                JUDGMENT OF THE COURT                                      provisions similar to those of Article 18 of the
                        ( Sixth Chamber)                                   agreement between the European Economic
                                                                           Community and the Kingdom of Sweden, signed in
                         of 17 July 1997                                   Brussels on 22 July 1972, concluded and approved on
in Joined Cases C-114/95 and C-115/95 (reference for                       behalf of the Community by Council Regulation
a preliminary ruling from the 0stre Landsret): Texaco                      (EEC) No 2838/72 of 19 December 1972 .
A/S v. Middelfart Havn and Others and Olieselskabet
      Danmark amba v. Trafikministeriet and Others (')                3 . Community law does not preclude the imposition by a
  (Maritime transport — Goods duty — Import surcharge)                     Member State of such an import surcharge on goods
                                                                           imported directly from a non-member country with
                          ( 97/C 295/05 )                                  which the Community has not concluded an
                                                                           agreement.
                 (Language of the case: Danish)
                                                                      4 . Where a Member State has imposed or approved a
   (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be            duty contrary to Community law, it is required in
           published in the European Court Reports)                        principle to repay the duty levied in breach of
                                                                           Community law. If the proceeds of the duty have been
In Joined Cases C-114/95 and C-115/95 : reference to the                   allocated to independent operators subject to local
Court under Article 177 of the EC Treaty from the 0stre                    authority control, it is not contrary to Community law
Landsret (Denmark ) for a preliminary ruling in the                        for the action for repaymemt of those duties to lie
proceedings pending before that court between Texaco A/S                   against such operators, provided that the rules
 and Middelfart Havn, Arhus Havn, Struer Havn, Alborg                      governing such actions are not less favourable than
 Havn, Fredericia Havn, Norre Sundby Havn, Hobro                           those governing similar domestic actions and are not
 Havn, Randers Havn, Abenra Havn, Esbjerg Havn,                            so framed as to render virtually impossible or
 Skagen Havn, Thyboron Havn and between Olieselskabet                      excessively difficult the recovery of duty unduly paid.
 Danmark amba and Trafikministeriet, Fredericia
 Kommune, Koge Havn, Odense Havnevsesen, Holstebro­                   5 . It is not contrary to Community law for a national
 Struer Havn, Vejle Havn, Abenra Havn, Alborg                              limitation period applicable to claims for repayment of
 Havnevassen, Arhus Havnevaesen, Frederikshavn Havn,                       duties levied in breach of Article 95 of the Treaty or a
 Esbjerg Havn on the interpretation of Articles 9 to 13 , 18               provision similar to Article 18 of the agreement
 to 29 , 84, 86 , 90 and 95 of the EEC Treaty, of Council                  concluded between the European Economic
 Regulation ( EEC ) No 4055/86 of 22 December 1986                          Community and the Kingdom of Sweden to run from
 applying the principle of freedom to provide services to                  an earlier point in time than that from which the
 maritime transport between Member States and between                      duties were discontinued.
 Member States and third countries ( OJ L 378 , 31 . 12 .
 1986 , p. 1 ), and of Council Regulation ( EEC) No 4056/86           (') OJ C 159 , 24 . 6 . 1995 .
 of 22 December 1986 laying down detailed rules for the
 application of Articles 85 and 86 of the Treaty to
 maritime transport ( OJ L 378 , 31 . 12 . 1986 , p. 4 ), and of
 Articles 6 and 1 8 of the Agreement between the European
 Economic Community and the Kingdom of Sweden,
 signed in Brussels on 22 July 1972, concluded and
 approved on behalf of the Community by Council                                      JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
 Regulation ( EEC ) No 2838/72 of 19 December 1972 ( OJ,                                         of 17 July 1997
 English Special Edition 1972 ( 31 December), p. 98 ), the
 Court ( Sixth Chamber ), composed of G. F. Mancini,                  in Case C-183/95 (reference for a preliminary ruling from
 President of the Chamber, J. L. Murray and P. J. G.                  the President of the College van Beroep voor het
 Kapteyn ( Rapporteur ), Judges; F. G. Jacobs, Advocate­              Bedrijfsleven): Affish BV v. Rijksdienst voor de Keuring
 General; H. von Holstein, Deputy Registrar, for the                                           van Vee en Vlees H
 Registrar, gave a judgment on 17 July 1997, in which it               (Veterinary inspection — Protective measure — Principle
 has ruled :
                                                                       of proportionality — Principle of the protection of
                                                                       legitimate expectations — Validity of Commission
  1 . It is contrary to Article 95 of the EEC Treaty for a                                    Decision 95/1 19/EC)
      Member State to impose a 40% import surcharge on a
      general duty levied on goods loaded, unloaded, or                                             97/C 295/06 )
      otherwise taken on board or landed within its ports or
      in the deep-water approach channels to its ports where                           (Language of the case: Dutch)
      goods are imported by ship from another Member
      State .
                                                                         (Provisional translation; the definitive translation will be
  2 . Such an import surcharge is also contrary to                              published in the European Court Reports)
      Community law where it is applicable to goods
      imported from a non-member country with which the                In Case C-183/95 : reference to the Court under Article 177
      Community has concluded an agreement containing                  of the EC Treaty from the President of the College van