Sysmex Europe GmbH v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Hafen.
Date: 2014-07-17
29. It is settled case-law that, in the interests of legal certainty and ease of verification, the decisive criterion for the classification of goods for customs purposes is in general to be sought in their objective characteristics and properties as defined in the wording of the relevant heading of the CN and in the section or chapter notes (see, inter alia, Roeckl Sporthandschuhe , C‑123/09, EU:C:2010:237, paragraph 27).
30. According to the case-law, the Explanatory Notes drawn up by the European Commission, as regards the CN, and by the WCO, as regards the HS, may be an important aid to the interpretation of the scope of the various tariff headings but do not have legally binding force (see, inter alia, Krings , C‑130/02, EU:C:2004:122, paragraph 28, and TNT Freight Management (Amsterdam) , C‑291/11, EU:C:2012:459, paragraph 32).
31. It must also be noted that the intended use of a product may also constitute an objective criterion for classification if it is inherent to the product, and that inherent character must be capable of being assessed on the basis of the product’s objective characteristics and properties (see RUMA , C‑183/06, EU:C:2007:110, paragraph 36, and Roeckl Sporthandschuhe , EU:C:2010:237, paragraph 28).
32. In that connection, it has been held, with regard to a product having two possible uses, that, as one of those uses was no more than a purely theoretical possibility, that product was, on the basis of its objective characteristics and properties, naturally intended for the other use and therefore came under the tariff heading relating to that use (see, by analogy, Thyssen Haniel Logistic , C‑459/93, EU:C:1995:160, paragraphs 17 and 18). Likewise, according to the case-law, in order to be classified under the tariff heading relating to a use, the product to be classified need not be solely or exclusively intended for that use. It suffices that that use is the main use for which the product is intended (see, to that effect, Neckermann Versand , C‑395/93, EU:C:1994:318, paragraphs 8 and 9, and Anagram International , C‑14/05, EU:C:2006:465, paragraph 26).
34. In the first place, with regard to heading 3822 of the CN, its wording refers to diagnostic or laboratory reagents. Moreover, it is mentioned in the HS Explanatory Notes on that heading that diagnostic reagents are used for the evaluation of physical, biophysical and biochemical processes and states in humans. According to those explanatory notes, the functions of those diagnostic reagents are based on a measurable or observable change in their biological or chemical constituents.
44. Furthermore, that conclusion cannot be called into question by Regulation No 827/2011, which classifies a product similar to that at issue in the main proceedings under heading 3212 of the CN, since that regulation is not applicable ratione temporis  to those proceedings. In any event, it should be noted that the Commission’s power to adopt measures relating to the classification of certain products in the CN does not authorise it to alter the subject-matter of the tariff headings which have been defined on the basis of the HS established by the Convention, the scope of which the Community has undertaken, under Article 3 thereof, not to modify (see Hewlett-Packard Europe , C‑361/11, EU:C:2013:18, paragraph 39 and the case-law cited).