swarb.co.uk - law index
These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.
Customs and Excise - From: 1997 To: 1997
This page lists 17 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.
Regina v HM Commissioners of Customs and Excise ex parte Bottlestop [1997] EWHC Admin 467
14 May 1997
Admn
Forbes J
Customs and Excise
The company complained of the seizure and retention of items pursuant to a search warrant. The warrant authorised entry to the Claimant's premises to "search for documents and other papers in relation to the movement of excisable goods". In executing the warrant customs officers removed all written and computer records of Bottlestop including its computer terminal, keyboard, mouse and all floppy discs. Held: The court rejecting a submission that the warrant did not extend to the computer.
Forbes J said: ". . it is said that the computer hardware, mouse, keyboard and such like, were unlawfully seized under the terms of the warrant, because the warrant was restricted to the search and seizure of documents. Again, there is no substance in that criticism. The data stored electronically on either the hard disk of the base units of the computer in question or on the floppy disks were all documents for the purposes of the warrant. That seems to me to be beyond argument. It appears that it was not fully appreciated that the base unit would include the hard disk within it and that the hard disk would have upon it electronically stored data and thus satisfies the definition of being a document for the purposes of the warrant. So far as items such as the mouse and the keyboard are concerned, arguably those were not documents and it may be, although I make no conclusive finding about the matter that, in taking those pieces of hardware, the officers in question may have gone beyond the terms of the warrant. Having regard to the fact that they are, to all intents, part and parcel of the base unit which are required to enable the base unit to be operated and since the base unit contained documents in the form of electronically stored material on the hard disk, it does seem to me that it is strongly arguable by Customs and Excise that the keyboard and mouse are part and parcel of the base unit, although detachable from it. If they are part and parcel of the base unit, then they are part and parcel of the packaging of the documents in question. However, it does not seem to me to be necessary to resolve such an interesting academic point in this case, because all the computer and its hardware were returned to the applicant in January of this year. There is therefore no need for this aspect of the matter to be resolved by reference to public law principles. Any legitimate complaint that the applicant may have so far as concerns the mouse, the keyboard and perhaps the VDU are, so it seems to me, perfectly capable of being dealt with by reference to remedies available in the field of private law. Accordingly, for those reasons I am satisfied that there is no substance in that aspect of the applicant's arguments."
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Bioforce v Oberfinanzdirektion Munchen C-405/95; [1997] EUECJ C-405/95
15 May 1997
ECJ
European, Customs and Excise
Europa The Common Customs Tariff is to be interpreted as meaning that Echinacea purpurea extract-based drops should be classified under heading 3004. The curative or prophylactic properties of that product as well as the way in which it is packaged, dispensed and marketed are in themselves such as to cause it to be regarded as a product possessing the characteristic properties of a medicament. In the Member States in which it is marketed the product in question is, moreover, authorized to be put on the market as a medicament or, at the very least, has been the subject of an application for authorization to that end. Furthermore, however great the alcohol content of the product in question it does not alter its nature, since the alcohol acts as an adjuvant, preservative and vehicle for that product.
[ Bailii ]
ICT v Fazenda Publica C-93/96; [1997] EUECJ C-93/96
29 May 1997
ECJ
G.F. Mancini, P
Customs and Excise
ECJ The increase provided for in Article 1(3) of Regulation No 738/92 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of cotton yarn originating in Brazil and Turkey must be applied whenever it is agreed that imported goods are to be paid for more than 30 days after their arrival in the customs territory of the Community, even where the difference between the price for deferred payment and that for immediate payment is greater, in percentage terms, than the increase to be applied.
That increase is intended to offset, automatically and at a standard rate, the commercial advantage which can result from deferred payment terms for goods, in order to prevent a form of credit dumping.
Such an increase must be applied to the price actually paid or payable for the goods when they are sold for export to the customs territory of the Community, excluding charges for interest as consideration for the deferred payment terms granted, provided that those terms are the subject of a `financing arrangement' within the meaning of Article 3(2) of Regulation No 1495/80, and that the level of charges reflects prevailing interest rates.
The free-at-Community-frontier price, to which the anti-dumping duty is applied, corresponds to the customs value of the imported goods, as defined by Article 3(1) of Regulation No 1224/80 on the valuation of goods for customs purposes, namely the price actually paid or payable for the goods when sold for export to the customs territory of the Community.
Under Article 3(2) of Regulation No 1495/80 implementing certain provisions of Articles 1, 3 and 8 of Regulation No 1224/80, charges for interest due under a financing arrangement entered into by the buyer and relating to the purchase of imported goods are not to be included in the customs value determined in that way, provided that those charges are distinguished from the price actually paid or payable for the goods, that the financing arrangement has been made in writing and that the buyer can demonstrate not only that such goods are actually sold at the price declared as the price actually paid or payable, but also that the claimed rate of interest does not exceed the level for such transactions prevailing in the country where, and at the time when, the finance was provided.
Regulation No 1495/80
[ Bailii ]
Rotexchemie v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Waltershof C-26/96; [1997] EUECJ C-26/96
29 May 1997
ECJ
Commercial, Customs and Excise
(Judgment) 1 Common commercial policy - Protection against dumping - Dumping margin - Determination of the normal value - Imports from non-market economy countries - Choice of a reference country - Discretion of the institutions - Judicial review - Limits (Council Regulation No 2176/84, Art. 2(5)(a))
2 Common commercial policy - Protection against dumping - Dumping margin - Determination of the normal value - Imports from non-market economy countries - Reference to the price in a market-economy non-member country - Determination in an appropriate and not unreasonable manner - Criteria to be used in the choice of a reference country (Council Regulations No 2176/84, Art. 2(5)(a), and No 1531/88)
3 Although the choice, under Article 2(5)(a) of the basic anti-dumping regulation (No 2176), of the reference country to be used in order to determine the normal value of products from non-market economy countries falls within the discretion enjoyed by the institutions when analysing complex economic situations, the exercise of that discretion is not exempt from judicial review by the Court. In reviewing the exercise of that discretion, the Court is to verify whether the relevant procedural rules have been complied with, whether the facts on which the choice is based have been accurately stated and whether there has been a manifest error of appraisal or a misuse of powers. As regards the choice of reference country, that means that the Court is to verify whether the institutions neglected to take account of essential factors for the purpose of establishing the appropriateness of the country chosen and whether the information contained in the documents in the case was considered with all the care required for the view to be taken that the normal value was determined in an appropriate and not unreasonable manner.
4 It is possible to conclude that the normal value of products originating in a non-market economy country was determined by reference to the price in a market-economy non-member country `in an appropriate and not unreasonable manner' within the meaning of Article 2(5)(a) of Regulation No 2176/84 where, first, the institutions did not receive any alternative proposal to their choice of reference country in circumstances where that country had already been chosen in an earlier proceeding concerning the same product, and where the traders concerned would not have failed, had they considered it necessary, to suggest a more appropriate country, and, secondly, those institutions have convincingly explained their reasons for not opting for other possible reference countries, without the applicant adducing any evidence capable of casting doubt on their analysis. For that reason, Regulation No 1531/88 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of potassium permanganate originating in the People's Republic of China and definitively collecting the provisional anti-dumping duty imposed on those imports is to be held valid.
[ Bailii ]
Klattner v Elliniko Dimosio C-389/95; [1997] EUECJ C-389/95
29 May 1997
ECJ
Transport, Customs and Excise
(Judgment) 1 Tax provisions - Harmonization of laws - Tax exemptions applicable to temporary importation of means of transport - Directive 83/182 - Restriction of the number of private vehicles which one person can import free of tax - No such restriction (Council Directive 83/182, Art. 3)
2 Tax provisions - Harmonization of laws - Tax exemptions applicable to temporary importation of means of transport - Directive 83/182 - Article 3 - Direct effect (Council Directive 83/182, Art. 3)
3 Tax provisions - Harmonization of laws - Tax exemptions applicable to temporary importation of means of transport - National rules penalizing the importation of a second private vehicle free of tax by requiring the immediate payment of the customs duties and charges normally applicable and payment of a surcharge of an amount equal to those duties and charges - Not permissible (Council Directive 83/182, Art. 3)
4 Article 3 of Directive 83/182 on tax exemptions within the Community for certain means of transport temporarily imported into one Member State from another must be interpreted as meaning that the exemption for which it provides may be granted in respect of more than one private vehicle per person.
First, the Directive does not place any express limit on the number of private vehicles for which exemption may be claimed, nor is any such limitation evident from the wording of Article 3.
Second, such a limitation is liable to hinder freedom of movement of persons resident within the Community, whereas the objective pursued by the directive is the elimination of obstacles to the establishment of an internal market resulting from the taxation arrangements applied to the temporary importation of certain means of transport for private or business use.
5 Article 3 of Directive 83/182 on tax exemptions within the Community for certain means of transport temporarily imported into one Member State from another has direct effect and confers on individuals rights which they may assert against a Member State that has failed to transpose that directive into domestic law, or has transposed it incorrectly, and which the national courts must safeguard.
That provision - which requires the Member States to grant individuals, subject to the conditions which it specifies, exemption from taxes where they temporarily import certain means of transport for private use - appears, as far as its subject-matter is concerned, to be unconditional in so far as it is not qualified by any condition and is not made subject, in its implementation or effects, to the adoption of any measure either by the Community institutions or by the Member States, and is unequivocal, that is to say, sufficiently precise to be relied on by an individual and applied by the courts.
6 Article 3 of Directive 83/182 on tax exemptions within the Community for certain means of transport temporarily imported into one Member State from another must be interpreted as precluding domestic legislation under which the customs duties and other taxes applicable together with additional duty equal to the amount of those duties and taxes are to be payable immediately where a second private vehicle is imported temporarily. National legislation cannot penalize such temporary importation, which is authorized by that provision, without undermining the effect of the Directive.
[ Bailii ]
Codiesel v Conselho Tecnico Aduaneiro C-105/96; [1997] EUECJ C-105/96
17 Jun 1997
ECJ
European, Customs and Excise
(Judgment) Common Customs Tariff - Tariff headings - Electrical apparatus constituting an 'uninterruptible power supply' - Classification in the Nomenclature of the Common Customs Tariff
[ Bailii ]
Customs and Excise v Invicta Poultry Ltd and Fareway Trading Co Ltd; Same v Direct Bargain Supplies Ltd Times, 29 July 1997; Gazette, 16 July 1997; [1997] EWHC Admin 614
2 Jul 1997
Admn
VAT, VAT, Customs and Excise
Import duty underpaid for Customs error is recoverable unless the mistake was undiscoverable by the trader acting in good faith.
Council Regulation 2913/92 (OJ 1992 L302/1)
[ Bailii ]
Giloy v Hauptzollamt Frankfurt am Main-Ost C-130/95; [1997] EUECJ C-130/95
17 Jul 1997
ECJ
European, Customs and Excise
ECJ Article 177 - Jurisdiction of the Court - National legislation adopting Community provisions - Community Customs Code - Appeal - Suspension of a customs decision - Provision of security
EC Treaty 177
[ Bailii ]
Texaco v Middelfart Havn C-115/95; [1997] EUECJ C-115/95
17 Jul 1997
ECJ
European, Customs and Excise
Free Movement of Goods - Maritime transport - Goods duty - Import surcharge
[ Bailii ]
Haahr Petroleum v Abenra Havn and others C-90/94; [1997] EUECJ C-90/94; [1997] ECR I-4085
17 Jul 1997
ECJ
Customs and Excise
(Judgment) Maritime transport - Goods duty - Import surcharge
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Travers; CACD 28-Aug-1997 - Gazette, 28 August 1997
Rank Xerox Manufacturing v Inspecteur der Invoerrechten en Accijnzen C-67/95; [1997] EUECJ C-67/95; [1997] ECR I-5401
9 Oct 1997
ECJ
European, Customs and Excise
ECJ The Common Customs Tariff must be interpreted as meaning that apparatuses which can both send faxes and make copies, and comprise a scanning device (scanner), a digital storage device (memory) and a printing device (laser printer), are to be classified under sub-heading 9009 12 00 of the combined nomenclature.
Such multi-function machines, which might be classified either under heading 8517 or under heading 9009, must be classified, in accordance with general rule 3(c) for the interpretation of the combined nomenclature, under the heading which occurs last in numerical order among those which equally merit consideration since, first, general rule 3(a), according to which the most specific description is to be preferred, is excluded because the relevant tariff headings fall within different chapters and, second, general rule 3(b) does not apply because those apparatuses display no feature enabling their essential character to be determined.
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Sadruddin Hashwani v Andrew Phillip Lloyd Letherby (Acting for the Commissioners for Customs and Excise) [1997] EWHC Admin 907
21 Oct 1997
Admn
Kennedy VP LJ, Smith J
Customs and Excise
Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 49(1)(b)
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ex parte Wagstaff [1997] EWHC Admin 903
21 Oct 1997
Admn
Customs and Excise
Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 170(2)
[ Bailii ]
Eurotunnel and others v SeaFrance C-408/95; [1997] EUECJ C-408/95; ECLI:EU:C:1997:532; [1997] ECR I-6315
11 Nov 1997
ECJ
European, Customs and Excise
ECJ Transitional arrangements for tax-free shops - Council Directives 91/680/EEC and 92/12/EEC - Assessment of validity.
[ Bailii ]
Wiener SI GmbH v Hauptzollamt Emmerich C-338/95; [1997] EUECJ C-338/95; [1997] ECR I-6495
20 Nov 1997
ECJ
M. Wathelet R P
Customs and Excise
ECJ Subheading 60.04 B IV b 2 bb of the Common Customs Tariff, in the version resulting from Regulation No 3400/84 amending Regulation No 950/68 on the Common Customs Tariff, must be construed as covering under garments which, by reason of their objective characteristics, are intended to be worn exclusively or essentially in bed. It is for the national court to determine, in the light of the cut of the garments, their composition and presentation, and developments in fashion within the Member State concerned, whether those garments do have such objective characteristics or whether, on the contrary, they may be worn equally in bed and elsewhere.
Advocate General Jacobs referred to the emergence of a body of case law developed by the CJEU to which national courts and tribunals can resort in resolving new questions of Community law: "Experience has shown that that case law now provides sufficient guidance to enable national courts and tribunals - and in particular specialised courts and tribunals - to decide many cases for themselves without the need for a reference . ."
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Techex Computer, Grafik Vertriebs GmbH v Hauptzollamt Munchen C-382/95; [1997] EUECJ C-382/95
18 Dec 1997
ECJ
European, Customs and Excise
ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling: Bundesfinanzhof - Germany. Common Customs Tariff - Tariff headings - Tariff classification of a 'Vista board' electronic component intended for image processing and capable of being used as a graphics card in a computer - Classification in the Combined Nomenclature.
[ Bailii ]
