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-613/12: Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 6 February 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf (Germany)) — Helm Düngemittel GmbH v Hauptzollamt Krefeld (Request for a preliminary ruling — Customs union and Common Customs Tariff — Euro-Mediterranean Agreement with Egypt — Article 20 of Protocol 4 — Proof of origin — Movement certificate EUR.1 — Replacement movement certificate EUR.1 issued at a time when the goods were no longer under the control of the issuing customs authority — Refusal to apply preferential treatment)

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62012CA0613

62012CA0613

February 6, 2014
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

29.3.2014

Official Journal of the European Union

C 93/15

(Case C-613/12) (<span class="super">1</span>)

(Request for a preliminary ruling - Customs union and Common Customs Tariff - Euro-Mediterranean Agreement with Egypt - Article 20 of Protocol 4 - Proof of origin - Movement certificate EUR.1 - Replacement movement certificate EUR.1 issued at a time when the goods were no longer under the control of the issuing customs authority - Refusal to apply preferential treatment)

2014/C 93/23

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Helm Düngemittel GmbH

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Krefeld

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht Düsseldorf — Interpretation of Article 20 of Protocol 4 to the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an Association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Arab Republic of Egypt, of the other part (OJ 2004 L 304, p. 39), as amended by Decision No 1/2006 of the EU-Egypt Association Council of 17 February 2006 (OJ 2006 L 73, p. 1) — Replacement movement certificate issued subsequently, at a point in time at which the goods were no longer under the control of the issuing customs authorities.

Operative part of the judgment

1.The Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Arab Republic of Egypt, of the other part, signed in Luxembourg on 25 June 2001, approved by Council Decision 2004/635/EC of 21 April 2004, must be interpreted as meaning that the Egyptian origin of goods, within the meaning of the preferential customs arrangement established by that agreement, can be proved even in the case where the goods were divided up when they arrived in a first Member State in order that a portion of them could be sent to a second Member State and where the replacement movement certificate EUR.1 issued by the customs authorities of the first Member State for the portion of those goods sent to the second Member State does not satisfy the conditions for the issuance of such a certificate set out in Article 20 of Protocol 4 to that agreement concerning the definition of the concept of ‘originating products’ and methods of administrative cooperation, as amended by Decision No 1/2006 of the EU Egypt Association Council of 17 February 2006.

2.The administration of such proof requires, however, first, that the preferential origin of the goods initially imported from Egypt be established by means of a movement certificate EUR.1 issued by the Egyptian customs authorities in accordance with that protocol and, second, that the importer prove that the portion of the goods divided up in that first Member State and dispatched to the second Member State corresponds to a portion of the goods imported from Egypt into the first Member State. It is for the referring court to determine whether those conditions are satisfied in the main proceedings.

(<span class="super">1</span>) OJ C 101, 6.4.2003.

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