AC-ATEL Electronics v Hauptzollamt Munchen-Mitte: ECJ 2 Jun 1994

ECJ 1. Preliminary rulings – Jurisdiction of the Court – Limits – Jurisdiction of the national court – Determination and assessment of the facts of the dispute – Need for a preliminary ruling and relevance of the questions raised -Assessment by the national court
(EEC Treaty, Art. 177)
2. Common commercial policy – Protection against dumping – Regulation imposing an anti-dumping duty – Products identified by reference to an outdated version of the Combined Nomenclature – Corrigendum substituting references – Scope of regulation unchanged – Validity
(Commission Regulation No 165/90)
1. Under Article 177 of the Treaty, which is based on a clear separation of functions between the national courts and the Court of Justice, the latter is empowered to rule only on the interpretation or validity of Community provisions on the basis of the facts which the national court puts before it. It is not for the Court of Justice, but for the national court, to ascertain the facts which have given rise to the dispute and to establish the consequences which they have for the judgment which it is required to deliver. It is, moreover, solely for the national court before which the dispute has been brought, and which must assume responsibility for the subsequent judicial decision, to determine in the light of the particular circumstances of each case both the need for a preliminary ruling in order to enable it to deliver judgment and the relevance of the questions which it submits to the Court.
2. If the products in question remain the same, the fact that a regulation imposing anti-dumping duties has been made the subject of a corrigendum since its publication does not affect the validity of the final version if the sole purpose of the corrigendum is to replace identification of the products by reference to a version of the Combined Nomenclature no longer in force with references to codes under that nomenclature as since amended. Such a corrigendum merely corrects a clerical error without altering the scope of the regulation.


J.C. Moitinho de Almeida, P


[1994] ECR I-2305, C-30/93, [1994] EUECJ C-30/93




EEC Treaty 177, Commission Regulation No 165/90

Cited by:

CitedRevenue and Customs v Aimia Coalition Loyalty UK Ltd SC 13-Mar-2013
The company managed a card loyalty scheme for retailers. The Revenue appealed against a decision that the company could reclaim VAT input tax on the goods purchased on the customers redeeming their points. The ECJ had decided that the service . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.


Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.161061