JUDGMENT OF 12. 12. 1973 — CASE 149/73 WITT v HAUPTZOLLAMT HAMBURG-ERICUS

In Case 149/73 Reference to the Court under Article 177 of the EEC Treaty by the Hamburg Finanzgericht for a preliminary ruling in the action pending before that court between

THE COURT composed of: R. Lecourt, President, M. Sørensen (Rapporteur), President of Chamber, R. Monaco, J. Mertens de Wilmars, P. Pescatore, H. Kutscher and C. Ó Dálaigh, Judges, Advocate-General: A. Trabucchi Registrar: A. Van Houtte

gives the following

JUDGMENT

Issues of fact and of law

I — Facts and procedure

II — Written observations submitted to the Court

Grounds of judgment

Costs

A —. The facts of the case, the subject matter of the request and the views of the parties may be summarized as follows:

I —. Facts and procedure

1. The Common Customs Tariff (CCT), in the version which was in force in 1970, contained the following headings:

2. Between February and October 1970 Firma Witt imported frozen caribou meat into the Community from Greenland.

3. That Court decided to suspend the proceedings and to refer the following questions to the Court of Justice, pursuant to Article 177 of the EEC Treaty, for a preliminary ruling:

4. In the grounds of the order making the reference the Finanzgericht stated in particular:

5. This order of the Finanzgericht was registered at the Court on 11 July 1973.

II —. Written observations submitted to the Court

B —. Firma Witt and the Commission submitted oral observations at the hearing on 14 November 1973.

C —. The Advocate-General presented his opinion at the hearing on 28 November 1973.

1. By order of 18 June 1973, registered at the Court on 11 July 1973, the Hamburg Finanzgericht referred two questions, pursuant to Article 177 of the EEC Treaty, on the interpretation of the expression game as it appears at subheading 02.04-B of the Common Customs Tariff 1970.

2. The arguments put forward by the Commission to justify the classification of all reindeer meat under the same subheading in this way, leaving no possibility for a different treatment of the meat of wild reindeer as compared with that of domestic reindeer, consist in the absence as between the two products of objective characteristics and properties which would allow one to be distinguished from the other when submitted for customs clearance.

3. The Explanatory Notes to the Common Customs Tariff, although an important factor as regards interpretation in all cases where the provisions of the tariff provoke uncertainty, cannot amend those provisions, the meaning and scope of which are sufficiently clear.

4. Accordingly, the answer to the questions referred is that the expression game as it appears at subheading 02.04-B of the Common Customs Tariff 1970 is to be interpreted as applying to animals living in the wild state which are hunted.

5. The costs incurred by the Commission of the European Communities, which has submitted observations to the Court, are not recoverable, and as these proceedings are, insofar as the parties to the main action are concerned, a step in the action pending before a national court, the decision on costs is a matter for that court.

On those grounds, Upon reading the pleadings; Upon hearing the report of the Judge-Rapporteur; Upon hearing the observations of the Commission of the European Communities and Firma Witt; Upon hearing the opinion of the Advocate-General; Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, especially Article 177; Having regard to Regulation (EEC) No 950/68, concerning the Common Customs Tariff; Having regard to the Protocol on the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Communities, especially Article 20; Having regard to the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice of the European Communities, THE COURT in answer to the questions referred to it by the Hamburg Finanzgericht by order of that court dated 18 June 1973, hereby rules: