Staatssecretaris van Financiën v TNT Freight Management (Amsterdam) BV.
Date: 2012-07-12
25. Therefore, without there being any need to determine whether the Court has jurisdiction, in the context of the cooperation between it and the national courts under Article 267 TFEU, to rule on the interpretation of the provisions of the HS, such an interpretation is in any event unnecessary in the present case, since those provisions apply at European Union level only via the CN, which is established in the basis of the HS (see, to that effect, Case C-510/99 Tridon  [2001] ECR I-7777, paragraph 24).
30. 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 found in their objective characteristics and properties as defined in the wording of the relevant heading of the CN and of the section or chapter notes (see, in particular, Case C-339/98 Peacock  [2000] ECR I-8947, paragraph 9; Case C-396/02 DFDS [2004] ECR I-8439, paragraph 27; Case C-495/03 Intermodal Transports  [2005] ECR I-8151, paragraph 47; and Case C-142/06 Olicom  [2007] ECR I-6675, paragraph 16).
31. It follows, from the general rules for the interpretation of the CN Nos 1 and 6 that the classification of goods is determined for legal purposes by the terms of the headings and subheadings and by the section and chapter notes which are legally binding.
32. The Explanatory Notes drawn up by the Commission as regards the CN and by the World Customs Organisation 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 Case C-250/05 Turbon International  [2006] ECR I-10531, paragraph 16).
33. For the purposes of classification under the appropriate heading, the intended use of a product may 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, inter alia, Thyssen Haniel Logistic , paragraph 13; Case C-183/06 RUMA [2007] ECR I-1559, paragraph 36; and Olicom , paragraph 18).
40. In that connection, it must be stated that, in order to classify products in Chapter 30 of the CN, the Court examined whether the latter had clearly defined therapeutic or prophylactic characteristics with an effect concentrated on precise functions of the human organism or that they are capable of being applied in the prevention or treatment of diseases or ailments (Case C-201/96 LTM  [1997] ECR I-6147, paragraphs 37 and 45, and Case C-270/96 Laboratoires Sarget  [1998] ECR I-1121, paragraphs 39 and 48).
41. It may also be deduced from Thyssen Haniel Logistic  that a product which, on account of its objective characteristics and properties, is clearly intended for medical use, may be classified in Chapter 30 of the CN. In that judgment, a sterile powder was at issue which was composed of a mixture of amino acids which, after water was added, was administered in the form of infusion solutions during medical treatment. That product was therefore devoid of medicinal properties as such but was nevertheless classified in Chapter 30 of the CN on account of its intended use.
42. Therefore, it must be held that since blood albumin does not have an intrinsic therapeutic effect, but is used in the prevention or treatment of an illness or complaint, must, provided that it is specifically intended for such a use, be regarded as prepared for therapeutic use within the meaning of Note 1(g) of Chapter 30 of the CN.