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-256/07: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 19 March 2009 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf (Germany)) — Mitsui & Co. Deutschland GmbH v Hauptzollamt Düsseldorf (Community Customs Code — Repayment of customs duties — Article 29(1) and (3)(a) — Value for customs purposes — Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 — Article 145(2) and (3) — Taking into account, for customs valuation purposes, of payments made by the seller in performance of a warranty obligation provided for in the contract of sale — Temporal application — Substantive rules — Procedural rules — Retroactive application of a rule — Validity)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62007CA0256

62007CA0256

January 1, 2007
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

(Case C-256/07) (Community Customs Code - Repayment of customs duties - Article 29(1) and (3)(a) - Value for customs purposes - Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 - Article 145(2) and (3) - Taking into account, for customs valuation purposes, of payments made by the seller in performance of a warranty obligation provided for in the contract of sale - Temporal application - Substantive rules - Procedural rules - Retroactive application of a rule - Validity)

2009/C 113/08

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Mitsui & Co. Deutschland GmbH

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Düsseldorf

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht Düsseldorf — Interpretation of Article 29(1) and (3)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1992 L 302, p. 1), and Article 145(2) and (3) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1993 L 253, p. 1), as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 444/2002 of 11 March 2002 (OJ 2002 L 68, p. 11) — Validity of those provisions in so far as they also apply retroactively to imports in respect of which the customs declaration was accepted before the entry into force of Commission Regulation (EC) No 444/2002 — Taking into account, in the context of the determination of the customs value of imported goods, payments made by the seller in performance of a warranty obligation, laid down in the contract of sale, to reimburse to the buyer the costs incurred in providing services under the warranty which the buyer had to provide to its own customers as a result of defective goods

Operative part of the judgment

1.Article 29(1) and (3)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code and Article 145(2) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Regulation No 2913/92, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 444/2002 of 11 March 2002, must be interpreted as meaning that, when defects affecting goods became apparent after the goods were released for free circulation, but it is demonstrated that they existed before such release, and those defects give rise, under a warranty obligation, to subsequent reimbursements by the seller/manufacturer to the buyer, reimbursements which correspond to the costs of repairs invoiced by the buyer’s own distributors, such reimbursements can result in a reduction of the transaction value of the goods and, as a result, of their customs value, which was declared on the basis of the price initially agreed between the seller/manufacturer and the buyer.

2.Article 145(2) and (3) of Regulation No 2454/93, as amended by Regulation No 444/2002, do not apply to imports in respect of which the customs declarations were accepted before 19 March 2002.

* * *

(1) OJ C 183, 4.8.2007.

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