Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62010CA0392

Case C-392/10: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 19 January 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg — Germany) — Suiker Unie GmbH — Zuckerfabrik Anklam v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas (Regulation (EC) No 800/1999 — Article 15(1) and (3) — Agricultural products — System of export refunds — Differentiated export refund — Conditions for granting — Import of the product into the third country of destination — Payment of import duties)

IO C 73, 10.3.2012, p. 4–4 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

10.3.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 73/4


Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 19 January 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Hamburg — Germany) — Suiker Unie GmbH — Zuckerfabrik Anklam v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas

(Case C-392/10) (1)

(Regulation (EC) No 800/1999 - Article 15(1) and (3) - Agricultural products - System of export refunds - Differentiated export refund - Conditions for granting - Import of the product into the third country of destination - Payment of import duties)

2012/C 73/05

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Hamburg

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Suiker Unie GmbH — Zuckerfabrik Anklam

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Jonas

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht Hamburg — Interpretation of Article 15(1) and (3) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/1999 of 15 April 1999 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products (OJ 1999 L 102, p. 11) and of Article 24 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1992 L 302, p. 1) — Product exported from a Member State to a third State for the purpose of substantial processing under the inward processing procedure without payment of import duty — Export of the product resulting from that processing to another third State — Conditions for the grant of a differentiated export refund — Need to place the product in free circulation in the third State of destination with payment of import duty?

Operative part of the judgment

Article 15(1) and (3) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/1999 of 15 April 1999 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 444/2003 of 11 March 2003, must be interpreted as meaning that the condition for receipt of a differentiated refund laid down by that article, namely completion of the customs import formalities, is not satisfied when in the third country of destination, following release for inward processing without collection of import duties, the product undergoes a ‘substantial processing or working’ within the meaning of Article 24 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code and the product resulting from that processing or working is exported to a third country.


(1)  OJ C 288, 23.10.2010.


Top