EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62001CJ0078
Judgment of the Court of 23 September 2003. # Bundesverband Güterkraftverkehr und Logistik eV (BGL) v Bundesrepublik Deutschland. # Reference for a preliminary ruling: Bundesgerichtshof - Germany. # Free movement of goods - External transit operation - Transport under cover of a TIR carnet - Offences or irregularities - Possibility for a guaranteeing association to prove the place where the offence or irregularity was committed - Time-limit for furnishing proof - Existence of an obligation for the Member State which detects an offence or irregularity to investigate the place where it was committed. # Case C-78/01.
Judgment of the Court of 23 September 2003.
Bundesverband Güterkraftverkehr und Logistik eV (BGL) v Bundesrepublik Deutschland.
Reference for a preliminary ruling: Bundesgerichtshof - Germany.
Free movement of goods - External transit operation - Transport under cover of a TIR carnet - Offences or irregularities - Possibility for a guaranteeing association to prove the place where the offence or irregularity was committed - Time-limit for furnishing proof - Existence of an obligation for the Member State which detects an offence or irregularity to investigate the place where it was committed.
Case C-78/01.
Judgment of the Court of 23 September 2003.
Bundesverband Güterkraftverkehr und Logistik eV (BGL) v Bundesrepublik Deutschland.
Reference for a preliminary ruling: Bundesgerichtshof - Germany.
Free movement of goods - External transit operation - Transport under cover of a TIR carnet - Offences or irregularities - Possibility for a guaranteeing association to prove the place where the offence or irregularity was committed - Time-limit for furnishing proof - Existence of an obligation for the Member State which detects an offence or irregularity to investigate the place where it was committed.
Case C-78/01.
European Court Reports 2003 I-09543
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:C:2003:490
«(Free movement of goods – External transit operation – Transport under cover of a TIR carnet – Offences or irregularities – Possibility for a guaranteeing association to prove the place where the offence or irregularity was committed – Time-limit for furnishing proof – Existence of an obligation for the Member State which detects an offence or irregularity to investigate the place where it was committed)»
|
||||
|
||||
(Commission Regulation No 2454/93, Arts 454(3), first subpara., and 455)
(Commission Regulation No 2454/93, Arts 454 and 455)
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
23 September 2003 (1)
((Free movement of goods – External transit operation – Transport under cover of a TIR carnet – Offences or irregularities – Possibility for a guaranteeing association to prove the place where the offence or irregularity was committed – Time-limit for furnishing proof – Existence of an obligation for the Member State which detects an offence or irregularity to investigate the place where it was committed))
In Case C-78/01, REFERENCE to the Court under Article 234 EC by the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings pending before that court between Bundesverband Güterkraftverkehr und Logistik eV (BGL)and
Bundesrepublik Deutschland, represented by the Hauptzollamt Friedrichshafen, third party:Préservatrice Foncière Tiard SA, on the interpretation of Articles 454 and 455 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1993 L 253, p. 1),THE COURT,,
after considering the written observations submitted on behalf of:
having regard to the Report for the Hearing,
after hearing the oral observations of Bundesverband Güterkraftverkehr und Logistik eV (BGL), represented by M. Gräfin von Westerholt and M. Lausterer; the Hauptzollamt Friedrichshafen, represented by J. Kummer; Préservatrice Foncière Tiard SA, represented by H.-J. Prieß; and the Commission, represented by U. Wölker, acting as Agent, at the hearing on 9 July 2002,
after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the sitting on 14 January 2003,
gives the following
On those grounds,
THE COURT,
in answer to the questions referred to it by the Bundesgerichtshof by order of 11 January 2001, hereby rules:
Rodríguez Iglesias |
Wathelet |
Schintgen |
Timmermans |
Gulmann |
La Pergola |
Skouris |
Macken |
Colneric |
Cunha Rodrigues |
Rosas |
|
R. Grass |
G.C. Rodríguez Iglesias |
Registrar |
President |