You are on page 1of 1

C 312/6 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 10.10.

98

Regulation. On the other hand, it must presumably, be 1. What should the requirements be for furnishing proof
open to the Commission to bring proceedings in respect of of the place where an irregularity or offence was
decisions of the President of the Office directly under actually committed in the course of a transport
Article 173. That the Member States should be differently operation carried out under cover of a TIR carnet
situated from the Commission in the matter of challenging (first subparagraph of Article 454(3) of Commission
such decisions seems constitutionally anomalous. Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 (OJ L 253, 11.10.1993,
p. 1))? Is a statement from the carnet holder and the
(1) OJ C 199, 28.6.1997, p. 39. testimony of the lorry driver who has effected the
(2) Case 294/83, [1986] ECR 1339. transport for the carnet holder sufficient or must the
(3) Joined Cases 193/87 and 194/87, [1989] ECR 1045. proof comprise documents which unambiguously show
that the competent authorities in the other Member
State reached the conclusion that the irregularity or
offence was committed on their territory?

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Finanzgericht 2. If the Court of Justice takes the view that the actual
München by order of that court of 24 June 1998 in the place where the irregularity or offence was commited
case of Holz Geenen GmbH against Oberfinanzdirektion can be proved on the basis of statements of the carnet
München holder and the testimony of the lorry driver who
effected the transport operation, are the third and
(Case C-309/98) fourth subparagraphs of Article 454(3) of Directive
(98/C 312/10) (EEC) No 2454/93 to be interpreted as meaning that
they also apply in cases where the charges were
recovered in the Member State where the irregularity
or offence was detected, even though it has been
Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the
proved that the irregularity or offence was actually
European Communities by order of the Third Senate of
commited in another Member State?
the Finanzgericht München (Finance Court, Munich) of
24 June 1998, received at the Court Registry on 10 August
1998, for a preliminary ruling in the case of Geenen
GmbH against Oberfinanzdirektion München (Principal
Revenue Office, Munich) on the following question:

Is Commission Regulation (EC) No 1509/97 of 30 July


1997 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Appeal brought on 14 August 1998 by the Union Euro-
Combined Nomenclature (OJ L 204, 31.7.1997, p. 8) Ð peÂenne de l'Artisanat et des Petites et Moyennes Entrepri-
in this case rectangular wood blocks, 48 or 85 mm wide ” ses (UEAPME) against the judgment delivered on 17 June
72 mm high, used in the construction of window frames, 1998 by the Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition, of
consisting of layers of wood glued together with the grain the Court of First Instance of the European Communities
running parallel and with slightly rounded edges Ð in Case T-135/96 between the Union EuropeÂenne de
invalid? l'Artisanat et des Petites et Moyennes Entreprises
(UEAPME), supported by ConfeÂdeÂration GeÂneÂrale des
Petites et Moyennes Entreprises et du Patronat ReÂel
(CGPME), Union Professionnelle Artisanale (UPA), Natio-
naal Christelijk Middenstandsverbond (NCMV), Konink-
lijke Vereniging MKB-Nederland, FeÂdeÂration des Artisans,
Confederazione Generale Italiana del Artigianato (Confar-
Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Bundesfinanzhof tigianato), Wirtschaftskammer Österreich, Bundesvereini-
by order of that court of 7 July 1998 in the case of Haupt- gung der Fachverbände des Deutschen Handwerks eV
zollamt Neubrandenburg against Leszek Labis trading (BFH), and the Council of the European Union, supported
as Przedsiebiorstwo Transportowo-Handlowe Met-Trans', by the Commission of the European Communities
PL-Reda (Case C-316/98 P)
(Case C-310/98)
(98/C 312/12)
(98/C 312/11)

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the An appeal against the judgment delivered on 17 June 1998
European Communities by order of the Bundesfinanzhof by the Fourth Chamber, Extended Composition, of the
(Federal Finance Court) of 7 July 1998, received at the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in
Court Registry on 10 August 1998, for a preliminary Case T-135/96 between the Union EuropeÂenne de l'Artisa-
ruling in the case of Hauptzollamt Neubrandenburg nat et des Petites et Moyennes Entreprises (UEAPME),
against Leszek Labis trading as Przedsiebiorstwo supported by ConfeÂdeÂration GeÂneÂrale des Petites et
Transportowo-Handlowe Met-Trans', PL-Reda on the Moyennes Entreprises et du Patronat ReÂel (CGPME),
following questions: Union Professionnelle Artisanale (UPA), Nationaal Christe-