Official Journal of the European Union

C series

—

C/2025/1059

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 19 December 2024 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Rayonen sad Svilengrad and the Administrativen sad –Haskovo, Bulgaria) – ‘SISTEM LUX’ OOD (C-717/22), VU (C-372/23) v Teritorialna direktsia Mitnitsa Burgas

(Joined Cases C-717/22 and C-372/23, Sistem Lux)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Customs union - Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 - Union Customs Code - Article 15 - Provision of information to the customs authorities - Failure to comply with the customs legislation - Article 42 - Effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties - Framework Decision 2005/212/JHA - Confiscation of crime-related proceeds, instrumentalities and property - Articles 2(1) - Confiscation - National provision providing for the imposition of a fine of between 100 % and 200 % of the customs value of the goods and confiscation thereof irrespective of the owner)

(C/2025/1059)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring courts

Rayonen sad Svilengrad and Administrativen sad – Haskovo

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: ‘SISTEM LUX’ OOD (C-717/22), VU (C-372/23)

Defendant: Teritorialna direktsia Mitnitsa Burgas

Intervening parties: Rayonna prokuratura – Haskovo, Teritorialno otdelenie – Svilengrad (C-717/22), Okrazhna prokuratura – Haskovo (C-372/23)

Operative part of the judgment

1.Article 15 and Article 42(1) of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union Customs Code

must be interpreted as not precluding a national provision which makes it possible to establish a failure to comply with customs legislation on the sole ground of negligence, consisting of failure to use the prescribed form for declaring the goods being transported. By contrast, in such circumstances, those provisions preclude the imposition, on the person who failed to comply, of an administrative penalty which is at least equal to the customs value of the goods in respect of which he or she has failed to comply.

2.Article 42(1) and (2) of Regulation No 952/2013, read in conjunction with Article 17(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union

must be interpreted as not precluding a national provision which, for failure to comply with the customs legislation, provides not only for the imposition of a fine but also for the confiscation of the goods in respect of which the failure to comply has been committed, provided that the system of penalties applicable to that failure to comply, as a whole, complies with the requirement of proportionality.

3.Article 2(1) of Council Framework Decision 2005/212/JHA of 24 February 2005 on Confiscation of Crime-Related Proceeds, Instrumentalities and Property

must be interpreted as not applying to a confiscation measure adopted following a failure to comply with the customs legislation if that failure to comply does not constitute a criminal offence punishable by a custodial sentence of more than one year, but an administrative offence.

* * *

Language of the case: Bulgarian.