Subject of the case
Operative part

Subject of the case

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Rechtbank Haarlem – Interpretation and validity of Commission Regulation (EC) No 535/94 of 9 March 1994 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ 1994 L 68, p. 15), Commission Regulation (EC) No 1832/2002 of 1 August 2002 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ 2002 L 290, p. 1), Commission Regulation (EC) No 1871/2003 of 23 October 2003 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ 2003 L 275, p. 5) and Commission Regulation (EC) No 2344/2003 of 30 December 2003 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ 2003 L 346, p. 38) – Boneless, frozen, salted chicken cuts – Tariff classification.

Operative part

Operative part

The Court:

Declares that, in circumstances such as those in the main proceedings, in which the declarations for the customs procedure for ‘release for free circulation’ were made before 27 September 2005, it is not possible to rely on the decision of 27 September 2005 of the Dispute Settlement Body of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), adopting a report by the WTO appellate body (WT/DS269/AB/R, WT/DS286/AB/R) and two reports by a special WTO group (WT/DS269/R and WT/DS286/R), as amended by the appellate body, either in the interpretation of the additional note 7 to Chapter 2 of the combined nomenclature in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1810/2004 of 7 September 2004 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, or in assessment of the validity of that additional note.