24.8.2013

Official Journal of the European Union

C 245/6

(Case C-330/13)

2013/C 245/09

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Lukoil Neftohim Burgas AD

Defendant: Nachalnik na Mitnicheski punkt ‘Pristanishte Burgas tsentar’ pri Mitnitsa Burgas

Questions referred

1.Is the method for determining the aromatic constituent [content] of products under Chapter 27 of the CN, set out in Annex A to the explanatory notes to Chapter 27 of the CN, inconsistent with the definition of aromatic constituents contained in the general rules on Chapter 27 of the HS? If so, how are those constituents to be determined and is the ASTM D 2007 method a suitable and appropriate means of doing so?

2.What is the meaning of the term ‘non-aromatic constituents’ used in the explanatory notes to Chapter 27 of the CN, the explanatory notes to Chapter 27 of the HS and note 2 to Chapter 27 of the HS? Is the meaning of that term the same as that of the term ‘non-aromatic hydrocarbons’ or is it broader? If it is broader than the meaning of the latter term, does it include all constituents which, by reference to weight, are not covered by the term ‘aromatic constituents’, or does it refer to constituents of a product, such as the product at issue in the main proceedings, which, by reference to weight, do not fall under either of those two categories, that is to say ‘aromatic constituents’ or ‘non-aromatic constituents’?

3.Is it permissible for one and the same method to be used to determine both aromatic and non-aromatic constituent content for the purposes of Chapter 27 of the CN and Chapter 27 of the HS and, if so, which? If this is not permissible, which method must be used to determine the aromatic constituents and the non-aromatic constituents respectively?

4.Which of the two headings — 2707 or 2710 — of Chapter 27 most accurately describes a product with characteristics such as those of the product at issue in the main proceedings?

5.In the event that both headings describe with equal accuracy a product having characteristics such as those of the product at issue in the main proceedings, is it the fact that its weight is made up predominantly of aromatic constituents that gives the product its essential character?

6.Which of the two headings — 2707 or 2710 — covers products with properties which are most similar to the characteristics of the product at issue in the main proceedings?

7.Is there an inconsistency between part of the CN explanatory notes to [sub]headings 2707 99 91 and 2707 99 99 and note 2 to Chapter 27 of the HS, or is that note not exhaustive and to be regarded as merely illustrative?

8.Is there an inconsistency between the CN explanatory notes to subheadings 2707 99 91 and 2707 99 99 (which assign products consisting primarily of aromatic constituents that do not fulfil all four conditions set out at (a) to (d) to subheadings 2710 19 31 to 2710 19 99) and the explanatory notes to heading 2710 of the HS, Part I (B), to which the explanatory notes to Chapter 27 of the CN refer (and in accordance with which that heading does not cover oils in which the weight of the aromatic constituents exceeds that of the non-aromatic constituents, irrespective of whether they were obtained by the processing of petroleum oil or by any other process)?

9.Which is the authentic text and what is the authentic meaning of the second sentence of the CN explanatory notes to subheadings 2707 99 91 and 2707 99 99, which, in Bulgarian, reads ‘Между тези продукти могат да се упоменат’ [literal translation: ‘of these products mention may be made of’] and, in English, ‘[t]hese products [include]’?

10.How is a product with characteristics such as those of the product at issue in the main proceedings to be classified if the weight of the aromatic constituents in that product exceeds that of the non-aromatic constituents, but the product does not fulfil all four cumulative conditions set out in the first point of the explanatory notes to subheadings 2707 99 91 and 2707 99 99 of the CN?