Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 62009CN0367

    Case C-367/09: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Antwerpen (Belgium) of 8 September 2009 — Belgisch Interventie- en Restitutiebureau v SGS Belgium NV, Firme Derwa NV and Centraal Beheer Achmea NV

    SL C 297, 5.12.2009, p. 18–19 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    5.12.2009   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 297/18

    Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Antwerpen (Belgium) of 8 September 2009 — Belgisch Interventie- en Restitutiebureau v SGS Belgium NV, Firme Derwa NV and Centraal Beheer Achmea NV

    (Case C-367/09)

    2009/C 297/24

    Language of the case: Dutch

    Referring court

    Hof van beroep te Antwerpen

    Parties to the main proceedings

    Appellant

    :

    Belgisch Interventie- en Restitutiebureau

    Respondents

    :

     

    SGS Belgium NV

     

    Firme Derwa NV

     

    Centraal Beheer Achmea NV

    Questions referred

    1.

    Do the provisions of Articles 5 and 7 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 (1) of 18 December 1995 on the protection of the European Communities’ financial interests have direct effect in the national legal orders of the Member States without any discretion on the part of those Member States and without the national authorities being required to adopt any measures for their implementation?

    2.

    Can an international control and supervisory agency approved by the Member State in which the export declaration was accepted — in this case, Belgium — which has submitted a false certificate of unloading within the meaning of Article 18(2)(c) of Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87 (2) be deemed to be an economic operator within the meaning of Article 1 of Regulation No 2988/95, or a person who has taken part in the irregularity or is under a duty to take responsibility for the irregularity or to ensure that it is not committed, within the meaning of Article 7 of Regulation No 2988/95?

    3.

    Can a communication derived from an investigative report drawn up by the Economic Inspection Board, or a letter requesting the production of additional documents as evidence of the release for consumption, or a registered letter imposing a sanction, be deemed to be investigation or legal proceedings within the meaning of the third subparagraph of Article 3(1) of Regulation No 2988/95?

    (1)  OJ 1995 L 312, p. 1.

    (2)  Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87 of 27 November 1987 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products.

    Top