CELEX: C2004/179/10
Language: en
Date: 2004-07-10 00:00:00
Title: Case C-201/04: Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Hof van Beroep te Antwerpen by order of 27 April 2004 in the case of Belgian State and Ministry of Finance v N.V. Molenbergnatie

10.7.2004   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 179/5
            
         Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Hof van Beroep te Antwerpen by order of 27 April 2004 in the case of Belgian State and Ministry of Finance v N.V. Molenbergnatie
   (Case C-201/04)
   (2004/C 179/10)
   Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of 27 April 2004 of the Hof van Beroep te Antwerpen (Appeal Court, Antwerp), which was received at the Court Registry on 5 May 2004, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Belgian State and Ministry of Finance v N.V. Molenbergnatie on the following questions:
   
               1.
            
            
               Do Articles 217 to 232 of the Community Customs Code (Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 (1) of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code – these being the provisions of Chapter 3 (‘Recovery of the amount of the customs debt’) of Title VII (‘Customs debt’), the said Chapter 3 consisting of a Section 1 (‘Entry in the accounts and communication of the amount of duty to the debtor’ – Arts 217 to 221) and a Section 2 (‘Time limit and procedures for payment of the amount of duty’ – Arts 222 to 232) – apply to the recovery of a customs debt which was incurred prior to 1 January 1994 but recovery of which was not undertaken or initiated prior to 1 January 1994?
            
         
               2.
            
            
               If the first question is answered in the affirmative: must the notification prescribed in Article 221 of the Community Customs Code always take place after the amount of the duties has been entered in the accounts, or, in other words, must the notification prescribed in Article 221 of the Community Customs Code always be preceded by entry of the duties in the accounts?
            
         
               3.
            
            
               Does late notification of the amount of duties to the debtor – that is to say, notification made after expiry of the three-year period laid down in the original version of Article 221(3) of the Community Customs Code (in force prior to its replacement [effective from 19 December 2000] by Article 1.17 of Regulation (EC) No 2700/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2000), even though the customs authorities were in fact in a position to determine, within that three-year period, the precise amount of the duties legally due – make it impossible to pursue recovery of the customs debt in question, lead to the cancellation of the customs debt in question, or have some other consequence in law?
            
         
               4.
            
            
               Must Member States determine the manner in which notification of the amount of duties, as laid down in Article 221 of the Community Customs Code, must be made to the debtor?
               If the previous question is answered in the affirmative, can the Member State which has failed to specify how notification of the amount of duties as laid down in Article 221 of the Community Customs Code should be made to the debtor argue that any document in which the amount of the duties is set out and which (following entry in the accounts) was notified to the debtor may constitute notification to the debtor of the amount of duties, as prescribed in Article 221 of the Community Customs Code, even though that document does not in any way refer to Article 221 of the Community Customs Code or indicate that it relates to notification to the debtor of the amount of duties owed?
            
         
      (1)  OJ L 302 of 19 October 1992, pp. 1-50.