EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case C-383/11: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen Sad Varna (Bulgaria) lodged on 18 July 2011 — Digitalnet OOD v Nachalnik na Mitnicheski punkt — Varna Zapad pri Mitnitsa Varna

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62011CN0383

62011CN0383

July 18, 2011
With Google you find a lot.
With us you find everything. Try it now!

I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!

Valentina R., lawyer

Official Journal of the European Union

C 298/13

(Case C-383/11)

2011/C 298/25

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Digitalnet OOD

Defendant: Nachalnik na Mitnicheski punkt — Varna Zapad pri Mitnitsa Varna

Questions referred

1.How are the terms ‘modem’ and ‘internet access’ to be interpreted for the purposes of subheading 8528 71 13 of the 2009 Combined Nomenclature (Commission Regulation (EC) No 1031/2008 of 19 September 2008 (1), OJ L 291, p. 1) and the Explanatory Notes?

2.What is the relevant function (main function) of the set-top box, pursuant to which the tariff classification must be carried out: receipt of television signals or the use of a modem which facilitates interactive information exchange for the purposes of gaining access to the internet?

3.If the relevant function (main function) of the set-top box is the use of a modem which facilitates interactive information exchange for the purposes of gaining access to the internet, is the type of modulation and demodulation which the modem brings about or the type of modem used relevant to the tariff classification, or does it suffice that access to the internet is provided by means of the modem?

4.Is it permissible for the customs authorities to amend the customs duty classification of a specific product without physically checking the imported product, and for the experts’ report to be issued exclusively on the basis of written evidence, namely the user manual, technical characteristics and inspection of a device made by the same manufacturer which has the same number from another imported consignment?

5.Under which code of the 2009 Combined Nomenclature (Commission Regulation (EC) No 1031/2008 of 19 September 2008, OJ L 291, p. 1) should the goods forming the subject-matter of the proceedings (set-top box) be classified, having regard to the technical characteristics established in the main proceedings?

(1) OJ 2008 L 291, p. 1.

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia