This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62017CN0372
Case C-372/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Noord-Holland (Netherlands) lodged on 19 June 2017 — Vision Research Europe BV v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst/Douane kantoor Rotterdam Rijnmond
Case C-372/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Noord-Holland (Netherlands) lodged on 19 June 2017 — Vision Research Europe BV v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst/Douane kantoor Rotterdam Rijnmond
Case C-372/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Noord-Holland (Netherlands) lodged on 19 June 2017 — Vision Research Europe BV v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst/Douane kantoor Rotterdam Rijnmond
IO C 300, 11.9.2017, p. 17–18
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
11.9.2017 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 300/17 |
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Noord-Holland (Netherlands) lodged on 19 June 2017 — Vision Research Europe BV v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst/Douane kantoor Rotterdam Rijnmond
(Case C-372/17)
(2017/C 300/21)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Rechtbank Noord-Holland
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Vision Research Europe BV
Defendant: Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst/Douane kantoor Rotterdam Rijnmond
Question referred
Is Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 113/2014 (1) of 4 February 2014 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature valid if the Rechtbank is correct in its provisional view that subheading 8525 80 30 should be interpreted as meaning that the camera, as described in 2 and 12 above, which has a volatile memory whereby the images captured in the camera are lost when subsequent images are captured or when the camera is switched off, can be classified thereunder?