![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] [DONATE] | |||||||||
Court of Justice of the European Communities (including Court of First Instance Decisions) |
||||||||||
PLEASE SUPPORT BAILII & FREE ACCESS TO LAW
To maintain its current level of service, BAILII urgently needs the support of its users.
Since you use the site, please consider making a donation to celebrate BAILII's 25 years of providing free access to law. No contribution is too small. If every visitor this month gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing this vital service.
Thank you for your support! | ||||||||||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Court of Justice of the European Communities (including Court of First Instance Decisions) >> ZF Zefeser (Customs union) [2007] EUECJ C-62/06 (18 December 2007) URL: https://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/EUECJ/2007/C6206.html Cite as: [2007] ECR I-11995, [2007] EUECJ C-62/6, [2007] EUECJ C-62/06 |
[New search] [Printable version] [Help]
(Regulation (EEC) No 1697/79 Article 3 Post-clearance recovery of import duties Act that could give rise to criminal court proceedings Competent authority for classifying the act)
In Case C-62/06,
REFERENCE for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo (Portugal), made by decision of 11 January 2006, received at the Court on 6 February 2006, in the proceedings
Fazenda Pública Director Geral das Alfândegas
v
ZF Zefeser Importação e Exportação de Produtos Alimentares Lda,
intervening party:
Ministério Público,
composed of P. Jann, President of Chamber, A. Tizzano (Rapporteur), R. Schintgen, M. Ilešič and E. Levits, Judges,
Advocate General: V. Trstenjak,
Registrar: M. Ferreira, Principal Administrator,
having regard to the written procedure and further to the hearing on 1 March 2007,
after considering the observations submitted on behalf of:
ZF Zefeser Importação e Exportação de Produtos Alimentares Lda, by L. Pinto, advogado,
the Portuguese Government, by L. Fernandes, A.M. Silva and M.Â. Seiça Neves, acting as Agents,
Ireland, by D. O'Hagan, acting as Agent, and by G. Clohessy SC, and N. Travers BL,
the Commission of the European Communities, by A. Caeiros and J. Hottiaux, acting as Agents,
after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 3 May 2007,
gives the following
Legal context
Community law
'whereas the amount of the import duties or export duties which the person liable for payment has been required to pay on goods entered for a customs procedure involving the obligation to pay such duties may prove to be lower than the amount which was legally due, either as a result of an error of calculation or copying on the part of the competent authorities or because those authorities used inaccurate or incomplete information, particularly as regards the nature, quantity, value, origin or end-use of the goods in question; whereas, because of the essentially economic nature of the import duties or export duties in force in the Community, failure to collect the correct duties has prejudicial consequences for the Community economy; whereas it is therefore justified to permit the competent authorities to make post-clearance recovery of the duties remaining due, where they establish that such an error has been made;
whereas the post-clearance recovery of import duties or export duties involves some degree of prejudice to the certainty which persons liable for payment have the right to expect from official acts having financial consequences; whereas it is therefore appropriate to limit the possible scope of action of the competent authorities in this field by fixing a time'limit after which the original determination of the import duties or export duties must be considered as definitive; whereas this restriction on action by the competent authorities cannot apply where at the time of the customs clearance of the goods the authorities have been unable, on account of an act that could give rise to criminal court proceedings, to determine the exact amount of the import duties or export duties; ... ;'
'Where the competent authorities find that all or part of the amount of import duties or export duties legally due on goods entered for a customs procedure involving the obligation to pay such duties has not been required of the person liable for payment, they shall take action to recover the duties not collected.
However, such action may not be taken after the expiry of a period of three years from the date of entry in the accounts of the amount originally required of the person liable for payment or, where there is no entry in the accounts, from the date on which the customs debt relating to the said goods was incurred.'
'When the competent authorities find that it is following an act that could give rise to criminal court proceedings that the competent authorities were unable to determine the exact amount of the import duties or export duties legally due on the goods in question, the period laid down in Article 2 shall not apply.
Under these circumstances, the competent authorities shall take action for recovery in accordance with the provisions in force in this respect in the Member States.'
National law
The case in the main proceedings and the questions referred
'(1) For the purposes of Article 3 of [Regulation No 1697/79], is classification by the customs authority as 'an act that could give rise to criminal court proceedings' sufficient, or is it instead necessary that that classification should be made by the competent criminal court?
(2) In the latter hypothesis, is it sufficient for the competent criminal justice authority (in the case of Portugal, the Public Prosecutor's Office) simply to lay a charge, or is it instead necessary that the debtor should be convicted in the relevant criminal proceedings?
(3) Also in the latter hypothesis, are different conclusions to be drawn from the fact that the court acquits the debtor by virtue of the application of the principle in dubio pro reo, [or] acquits him because it has been proved that the debtor did not commit the offence in question?
(4) What consequences follow if the Public Prosecutor's Office does not lay a charge against the debtor, holding that there is no evidence of an act that could give rise to criminal court proceedings? Will such a decision preclude any action to recover the duty not collected?
(5) If the Public Prosecutor's Office or the criminal court itself closes the case because the criminal proceedings are time barred, does [such a] decision make it impossible to bring the corresponding action to recover the duty not collected?'
The questions referred
The admissibility of the fourth question
The first and fifth questions
The second and third questions
Costs
On those grounds, the Court (First Chamber) hereby rules:
Classification of an act as 'an act that could give rise to criminal court proceedings' within the meaning of the first paragraph of Article 3 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1697/79 of 24 July 1979 on the post-clearance recovery of import duties or export duties which have not been required of the person liable for payment on goods entered for a customs procedure involving the obligation to pay such duties, falls within the competence of the customs authorities required to determine the exact amount of the import duties or export duties in question.
[Signatures]
* Language of the case: Portuguese.