Case C‑361/11
Hewlett-Packard Europe BV
v
Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst/Douane West, kantoor Hoofddorp
(Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank te Haarlem)
(Common Customs Tariff — Combined Nomenclature — Tariff classification — Multifunctional printers combining a laser printing module and a scanning module, with a copying function — CN code 8443 31 91 — Validity of Regulation (EC) No1031/2008)
Summary — Judgment of the Court (First Chamber), 17January 2013
1.Questions referred for a preliminary ruling — Jurisdiction of the Court — Identification of the relevant elements of EU law — Reformulation of the questions
(Art. 267 TFEU)
2.Customs union — Common Customs Tariff — Tariff heading — Multifunctional printers combining a laser printing module and a scanning module, with a copying function — Amendment of the tariff heading by the Commission — Rate of customs duties unchanged — Lawfulness
(Council Regulation No2658/87, Art. 9(1)(a), (b), (d) and (e); Commission Regulation No1031/2008)
3.International agreements — World Trade Organisation — Jurisdiction of the Court— Interpretation and assessment of the validity of acts of the EU institutions in the light of the WTO agreements — Not included — Exceptions — Act intended to ensure the performance of a particular obligation assumed in the context of the WTO— Express reference to precise provisions of those agreements — Judicial review— Exclusion before the expiry of a reasonable time-limit obtained by the European Union to comply with the WTO rules
1.See the text of the decision.
(see paras 35, 36)
2.The Commission, acting in cooperation with the customs experts of the Member States, has a broad discretion to define the subject-matter of tariff headings falling to be considered for the classification of particular goods. However, the Commission’s power to adopt the measures mentioned in Article9(1)(a), (b), (d) and (e) of Regulation No2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, such as supplementary notes, does not authorise it to alter the subject-matter of the tariff headings which have been defined on the basis of the Harmonised Commodity Description and Coding System, drawn up by the Customs Cooperation Council, now the World Customs Organisation and established by the International Convention on the Harmonised Commodity Description and Coding System, or to amend customs duty rates.
In order to ascertain whether, by altering a tariff heading, the Commission exceeded its discretion, it is necessary to examine the classification of the products at issue at the date of the entry into force of the alternation to the heading. In that regard, it must be held that the Commission did not, therefore, exceed the powers conferred on it by Article9 of Regulation No2658/87 when, by Regulation No1031/2008 amending Annex I to Regulation No2658/87, it classified the multifunctional printers under sub-heading 8443 31 91 of the Combined Nomenclature and made them subject to customs duties of 6%. Those multifunctional printers, comprising a laser printing module and a scanning module, with a copying function, were classified, before the entry into force of Regulation No1031/2008, under sub-heading 9009 12 00 of the Combined Nomenclature and were subject to the same customs duties.
(see paras 39, 40, 49, 50)
3.See the text of the decision.
(see paras 57-60)