- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-437/13: Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 23 October 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden — Netherlands) — Unitrading Ltd v Staatssecretaris van Financiën (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Community Customs Code — Recovery of import duties — Origin of goods — Means of proof — Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Article 47 — Rights of the defence — Right to effective judicial protection — Procedural autonomy of the Member States)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62013CA0437
62013CA0437
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
8.12.2014
Official Journal of the European Union
C 439/10
(Case C-437/13) (<span class="super">1</span>)
((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Community Customs Code - Recovery of import duties - Origin of goods - Means of proof - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Article 47 - Rights of the defence - Right to effective judicial protection - Procedural autonomy of the Member States))
(2014/C 439/14)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Unitrading Ltd
Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Financiën
Operative part of the judgment
1.Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union must be interpreted as not precluding proof of origin of imported goods adduced by the customs authorities on the basis of national procedural rules resting on the results of an examination carried out by a third party, with regard to which that third party refuses to disclose further information either to the customs authorities or to the customs declarant, as a result of which it is made difficult or impossible to verify or disprove the correctness of the conclusions reached, provided that the principles of effectiveness and equivalence are upheld. It is for the national court to ascertain whether that is so in the main proceedings.
2.In a situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings, and when the customs authorities cannot disclose further information in respect of the examination carried out, whether the customs authorities must grant the request of the party concerned that it conducts, at its own expense, an examination in the country declared as the country of origin and whether it matters that portions of the samples of the goods, to which the party concerned could have obtained access with a view to having an examination carried out by another laboratory, were still available for a limited period and, if so, whether the customs authorities must inform the party concerned that portions of the samples of the goods are still available and that it may request those samples for purposes of such an examination must be assessed on the basis of national procedural law.
Language of the case: Dutch
ECLI:EU:C:2014:140
* * *
(<span class="super">1</span>) OJ C 325, 9.11.2013.