Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

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
You are here

Document 61989CJ0384

1991 m. sausio 24 d. Teisingumo Teismo (antroji kolegija) sprendimas.
Baudžiamoji byla prieš Gérard Tomatis ir Christian Fulchiron.
Prašymas priimti prejudicinį sprendimą: Tribunal de grande instance de Nice - Prancūzija.
Bendrasis muitų tarifas.
Byla C-384/89.

ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:C:1991:31

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Second Chamber)

24 January 1991 ( *1 )

In Case C-384/89,

REFERENCE to the Court under Article 177 of the EEC Treaty by the Tribunal de grande instance (Regional Court), Nice, for a preliminary ruling in the criminal proceedings pending before that court against

Gérard Tomatis and Christian Fulchiron

on the interpretation of heading 87.02 of the Common Customs Tariff: ‘Motor vehicles for the transport of persons, goods or materials (including sports motor vehicles, other than those of heading 87.09)’,

THE COURT (Second Chamber)

composed of: T. F. O'Higgins, President of the Chamber, G. F. Mancini and F. A. Schockweiler, Judges,

Advocate General: F. G. Jacobs

Registrar: D. Louterman, Principal Administrator

(The grounds of the judgment are not reproduced.)

in answer to the questions referred to it by the Tribunal de grande instance, Nice, by judgment of 13 January 1989, hereby rules:

(1)

Subheading 87.02 A of the Common Customs Tariff must be interpreted as including vehicles having, behind the driver's seat or bench, specially fitted spaces for fixed, folding or removable seats, and having side windows, a rear or side door or a tail-gate, and an interior finish similar to that of vehicles designed for the transport of passengers.

(2)

The tariff classification given to a product by the authorities of one Member State may be challenged by the authorities of another Member State in connection with the classification of other examples of the same product or for the purposes of their national law.

( *1 ) Language of the case: French.

Top