This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62014CA0178
Case C-178/14: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 5 March 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — Vario Tek GmbH v Hauptzollamt Düsseldorf (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Customs union and Common Customs Tariff — Combined nomenclature — Tariff classification — Heading 8525 80 — Television cameras, digital cameras and video camera recorders — Subheadings 8525 80 91 and 8525 80 99 — Video cameras integrated into sports goggles — ‘Optical zoom’ function — Recording of files from external sources)
Case C-178/14: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 5 March 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — Vario Tek GmbH v Hauptzollamt Düsseldorf (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Customs union and Common Customs Tariff — Combined nomenclature — Tariff classification — Heading 8525 80 — Television cameras, digital cameras and video camera recorders — Subheadings 8525 80 91 and 8525 80 99 — Video cameras integrated into sports goggles — ‘Optical zoom’ function — Recording of files from external sources)
Case C-178/14: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 5 March 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — Vario Tek GmbH v Hauptzollamt Düsseldorf (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Customs union and Common Customs Tariff — Combined nomenclature — Tariff classification — Heading 8525 80 — Television cameras, digital cameras and video camera recorders — Subheadings 8525 80 91 and 8525 80 99 — Video cameras integrated into sports goggles — ‘Optical zoom’ function — Recording of files from external sources)
OJ C 138, 27.4.2015, p. 21–22
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
27.4.2015 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 138/21 |
Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 5 March 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — Vario Tek GmbH v Hauptzollamt Düsseldorf
(Case C-178/14) (1)
((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Customs union and Common Customs Tariff - Combined nomenclature - Tariff classification - Heading 8525 80 - Television cameras, digital cameras and video camera recorders - Subheadings 8525 80 91 and 8525 80 99 - Video cameras integrated into sports goggles - ‘Optical zoom’ function - Recording of files from external sources))
(2015/C 138/28)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Finanzgericht Düsseldorf
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Vario Tek GmbH
Defendant: Hauptzollamt Düsseldorf
Operative part of the judgment
|
1) |
The Combined Nomenclature in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, in the version resulting from Commission Regulation (EU) No 1006/2011 of 27 September 2011, must be interpreted as meaning that the fact that video cameras integrated into sport goggles, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, do not have an ‘optical zoom’ function, does not prevent their classification under subheadings 8525 80 91 and 8525 80 99 of that nomenclature. |
|
2) |
The Combined Nomenclature in Annex I to Regulation No 2658/87, in the version resulting from Regulation No 1006/2011, must be interpreted as meaning that the fact that video cameras integrated in sports goggles, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, offer the possibility to record and store on an interchangeable storage medium video and audio files from an external source precludes their classification under subheading 8525 80 91 of that nomenclature if that recording may be made independently and without relying on external materials or software. |