Opinion of Mr Advocate General Capotorti

Mr President,

Members of the Court,

1. This reference for a preliminary ruling raises a customs question concerning the extension of the power given by Community law to the national authorities of verifying the origin of imported goods where such goods have enjoyed preferential tariff treatment.

2. Article 13 (1) of the said Regulation No 1371/71 of the Commission states that the subsequent verifications of the certificates of origin for which it provides shall be carried out at random or whenever the competent customs authorities in the Community have reasonable doubt as to the authenticity of the document or the accuracy of the information regarding the true origin of the goods in question or their components. Article 13 (2) states that for the purpose of implementing the provisions of paragraph (1) the competent customs authorities in the Community shall return the certificate ... to the customs authorities of the exporting State, giving, where appropriate, the reasons of form or substance for an inquiry. The second subparagraph thereof adds that if the competent customs authorities in the Community decide to suspend application of the provisions relating, to tariff preferences referred to in Article 1 while awaiting the results of the verification, they shall offer to release the goods to the importer subject to any precautionary measures judged necessary.

3. Of relevance in the system of the said Regulation No 1371/71 is Article 30 which contains matters supporting the interpretation which I have given of the concept of subsequent verification. The second paragraph of that article provides: For the purpose of subsequent verification of certificates of origin on Form A, the competent governmental authority of the exporting country must keep the export documents, or copies of certificates used in place thereof, for two years. The purpose of that provision is certainly to allow the customs authorities of the Member States an opportunity to make subsequent verification within a period of two years from the issue of the certificate of origin. Evidence therefor is provided by the first paragraph of the same Article 30 according to which where an application for subsequent verification is made in application of the provisions of Article 13 of Title 1 the verification shall be made and the results communicated to the competent customs authorities in the Community within a maximum period of three months. The authorities of the exporting countries thus have a short period to make the verifications and that period runs from each demand addressed to them by the customs authorities of the Community; should the system require that the application for verification be made on importation (thus suspending customs clearance of the goods) there would be no reason to require preservation of the certificates of origin for longer than three months from importation. Conversely the requirement to preserve the certificates of origin for two years confirms that subsequent verification may be requested some time after importation of the goods.

4. Ciro Acampora attempts to counter the results of the interpretation based on the logic, wording and system of the provisions which I have analysed, by referring to the requirement to safeguard the expectations of the importer in good faith. Its argument basically maintains that when the customs authorities have allowed importation without any specific reservations, they have in so doing created on the part of the importer a legitimate belief in the regular and definitive nature of the customs clearance and they cannot afterwards, by requiring subsequent verification, impose unexpected burdens on him.

5. For the reasons I have thus explained I conclude by proposing that the Court should in answer to the reference for a preliminary ruling made by the Italian Corte di Cassazione by order of 27 June 1979 rule as follows:

1 Translated from the Italian.