HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) with effect from 1 April 2011
Customs Duties
Case: C00169 
(Adobe PDF file size 113kb)
Appellant: BROOMCO (1984) LTD
Respondent:
Post-Clearance Demands - New Zealand butter- Cleared on basis of certificates by New Zealand authorities- Later dispute as to validity-Quota under Protocol 18 of Accession Treaty- Whether post-clearance recovery impliedly excluded-No-Current access under WTO agreements-No exclusion in principle of post-clearance recovery under WTO law.
Case: C00167 (Adobe PDF file size 64kb)
Appellant: SEAPORT FREIGHT SERVICES LTD
Respondent: The Commissioners of Custom & Excise
CUSTOMS DUTY - External transit movements - Goods released from warehouse for export under forms T1 - Goods failed to reach office of destination - No evidence as to where irregularity occurred - Whether notification of non-discharge of T1s by Commissioners received by Appellant within time limit - Commission Reg EEC 2454/93 Art 379 CUSTOMS DUTY - Goods released for export failed to reach office of destination - Computation of customs value of goods - Evidence required - Calculation of value on statistical basis - Ccil Reg EEC 2913/92 Arts 30 to 32
Case: C00163 (Adobe PDF file size 56kb)
Appellant: DYNATRON UK LTD
Respondent: The Commissioners of Custom & Excise
CUSTOMS DUTY - cooling component for personal computers - component consisting of two parts, a heat sink and a fan - the fan incorporating a printed circuit board to control its function - whether classified as a fan (heading 84.14) or a computer part (84.73) - application of Rule 3(b) of the General Interpretation Rules - whether nature of components as "active" or "passive" relevant to the determination
Case: C00164 (Adobe PDF file size 39kb)
Appellant: EUROPEAN TEXTILES LTD C00164
Respondent: The Commissioners of Custom & Excise
CUSTOMS DUTY - Goods imported from Yugoslavia under form EUR1 - Preferential tariff treatment withdrawn from Yugoslavia - Form EUR1 therefore not valid - Appellant unaware of withdrawal of Yugoslavia - Post clearance demand for full amount of duty and import VAT - Whether debt entered into account at proper time - Whether duty and VAT should be repaid or remitted - Whether special situation arose - Council Reg 2913/92 EEC Arts 220, 239(1), (2) - Commission Reg 2454/93 EEC Arts 899, 904, 905 - Appeal dismissed
Case: C00161 (Adobe PDF file size 39kb)
Appellant: RANSOMES JACOBSEN LIMITED
Respondent: The Commissioners of Custom & Excise
CUSTOMS DUTY - Tariff Classification - Combined Nomenclature - vehicles constructed and designed for "turf management" - whether tractors within heading 8701 or vehicles for the transport of goods within heading 8704 or works trucks or tractors of the type used on railway platforms within heading 8709 - whether constructed essentially for hauling - held they were - whether main use for the transport of goods - held it was not - whether Commission Regulation 799/99 engaged - held it was not - held vehicles were tractors within heading 8701 - Appeal allowed
Case: C00159 (Adobe PDF file size 46kb)
Appellant: EUROBOX LINE AGENCIES LTD
Respondent: The Commissioners of Custom & Excise
CUSTOMS DUTY - Community transit procedure - Guarantee waiver - Refusal to grant guarantee waiver - Whether refusal reasonable - No
Case: C00157 (Adobe PDF file size 34kb)
Appellant: PETER GILDER & SONS LTD
Respondent: The Commissioners of Custom & Excise
Inward Processing Relief - Non-community goods - Commissioners requiring evidence of compliance with the IPR scheme - Refusal to accept inference as evidence - Reasonableness - Appeal dismissed
Case: C00148 (Adobe PDF file size 120kb)
Appellant: VTECH ELECTRONICS (UK) PLC
Respondent:
CUSTOMS DUTIES - Tariff classification - Whether Binding Tariff Information correct - Whether CN Code 9504 90 90 00 appropriate for Appellant's products - Whether Regulations No.981/98 and No.184/2000 applicable VIRES - Whether Binding Tariff Information valid - Whether Appellant entitled to challenge the validity of Regulations 981/98 and 184/2000
Case: C00140 (Adobe PDF file size 22kb)
Appellant: VIVA MEXICO (a firm)
Respondent:
CUSTOMS DUTY - Post-clearance demand - Incorrect declaration - Confectionery from Mexico - Failure to notify Appellants which parts of goods being examined under Art 240 of Implementing Reg - Failure to notify Appellants that samples being taken under Art 69.2 of Code - No evidence of prejudice - Community Customs Code (Council Reg (EEC) No.2913/92) Art 69.2, 220.1, 220.2(b), 239 - Implementing Regulation (Council Reg (EEC) No. 2454/93) Art 240 and 242.2 - Appeal dismissed
Case: C00139 (Adobe PDF file size 27kb)
Appellant: MATSUSHITA COMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRIAL UK LTD
Respondent:
CUSTOMS DUTY - RESTORATION OF GOODS - Refusal to restore - Reasonableness - Trailer found to be adapted for the purpose of concealing goods - Trailer seized at the point of entry - Commissioners refused to restore - Whether refusal reasonable - Yes - CEMA 1979 ss 80 and 152
Case:C00138(Adobe PDF file size 31kb)
Appellant:KRZYSZTOF DERECZENIK
Respondent:
CUSTOMS DUTY - RESTORATION OF GOODS - Refusal to restore - Reasonableness - Trailer found to be adapted for the purpose of concealing goods - Trailer seized at the point of entry - Commissioners refused to restore - Whether refusal reasonable - Yes - CEMA 1979 ss 80 and 152
Case: C00135 (Adobe PDF file size 27kb)
Appellant: LLOYD PASCAL & COMPANY LIMITED
Respondent:
CUSTOMS DUTY - tarpaulin - whether plastic coating could be seen with the naked eye (Chapter 59 Note 2a(3)) - no -- whether tarpaulin (6306) or other made-up articles (6307) - tarpaulin - appeal dismissed
Case: C00131 (Adobe PDF file size 164kb)
Appellant: PSL FREIGHT LIMITED
Respondent:
CUSTOMS DUTY - external Community transit procedure - two movements - consignments not presented at office of destination - place where the offence or irregularity occurred not established - whether customs debt incurred in the United Kingdom - yes - whether defects in notifications to Appellant mean that duty was not recoverable - no - whether obvious negligence by Appellant - yes - whether evidence of a special situation - no - appeal dismissed - Council Regulation (EEC) No. 2913/92 Arts 215 and 239; Commission Regulation (EEC) No. 2454/93 Arts 378, 379 and 905 VALUE ADDED TAX - goods imported from a place outside the member states - whether customs debt incurred on removal of goods to United Kingdom or while goods in the United Kingdom - no - whether goods exported and so zero-rated - no - appeal allowed - VATA 1994 s15(1)(c) and s30(6) and(8)
Case: C00130 (Adobe PDF file size 52kb)
Appellant: VIVA MEXICO (a firm)
Respondent:
CUSTOMS DUTY - Post-clearance demand - Incorrect declaration - Confectionery from Mexico - Whether incorrect entry resulted from error by Customs within Article 220.2(b) of Code - Effect of delay in notifying post-clearance demand - Failure to notify Appellants that samples being taken under Art 69.2 - Community Customs Code (Council Reg (EEC) No.2913/92, Art 69.2, 220.1, 220.2(b) - Adjourned on Art 69.2 issue - Appeal dismissed on other issues
Case: C00124 (Adobe PDF file size 32kb)
Appellant: D JACOBSON & SONS LTD
Respondent:
CUSTOMS DUTIES - Community Customs Code and its implementing provisions - tariff classification of ladies indoor slippers - appropriate heading in combined nomenclature - looking at sole and textile covering - textile covering held to be an accessory - appeal dismissed.
Case: C00123
Appellant: BROOMCO (1984) LTD
Respondent:
LON/97/7053, 7070 and 7087 -LON/98/7043-5, - 7085, 7094, 7102, -7109-10 and 7112 -
COSTS - Civil Procedure Rules - Applicability - Conduct of parties - Customs duty - Hardship proceedings - Security for duty under appeal - Commissioners refused certificate that £4.85 million security reasonable in circumstances - Tribunal determined that £4.85 million security reasonable - Costs of adjournment when Appellant ultimately successful on hardship issue - Evidence as to status and powers of NZDB under NZ law and of approaches to banks introduced 6 days before hearing initially fixed and not in list of documents although referred to - Adjournment at Commissioners' request - New contentions as to restrictions on Tribunal's jurisdiction introduced by Commissioners at late stage before main hearing but rejected - Trib Rules 1986 (1986 S.I. No. 590) rule 29(1)(b) - CPR 1999, Part 44.3 and 44.7 - Appellant awarded full costs
COSTS - Payment on account - Relevance of sums claimed under disputed PCDNs - Payment on account of costs directed
Case: C00122 (Adobe PDF file size 54kb)
Appellant: SAXON INDUSTRIES
Respondent:
CUSTOMS DUTY - Classification - Can an accessory to a seat belt be classified as an accessory to a motor vehicle - Commissioners' decision considered, set aside, and replaced by appropriate classification on objective criteria - s.16(5) FA 1994
Case: C00121 (Adobe PDF file size 60kb)
Appellant: ALIGN RITE LTD
Respondent:
CUSTOMS DUTY - End-use relief - Appellant failed to claim relief when it might have been available - Whether Commissioners empowered to grant relief retrospectively - No - Community Customs Code 2913/92 Arts 21, 82 and 86 - Whether special situation sufficient to support repayment of duty existed - No - Art 239 of Code and Art 905 of Implementing Regs 2454/93 - Appeal dismissed
Case: C00120 (Adobe PDF file size 23kb)
Appellant: NDC (UK) Limited
Respondent:
CUSTOMS DUTY-classification of tarpaulin coloured blue on one side and green of the other-whether this is the result of coating and whether the coating can be seen with the naked eye test in Note 2 to Chapter 59-yes-appeal allowed
Case: C00118 94kb)
Appellant: Niko Surgucal Ltd
Respondent:
CUSTOMS DUTY - BTI issued in May 1991 by Danish Customs to Danish Company - Whether applicable to identical goods imported into UK by associated company in 1996 - Council regulations EEC Nos 1715/90, 2674/92 and 2454/93 - Purposive approach to construction - Appeal allowed
Case: C00117 (Adobe PDF file size 50kb)
Appellant: Robin Watchorn & Rosemary Watchorn T/A Robin Watchorn Marketing
Respondent:
CUSTOMS DUTY - ANTI-DUMPING DUTY - Russian ammonium nitrate - Net cif price - Post clearance demand - Customs declarations for imported goods showed amounts in excess of minimum import price - Declared amounts alleged by Commissioners to be too high - Commissioners constructed net cif prices by working back from importer's selling prices - Importer given no opportunity to respond to Commissioners' allegations before post clearance demand was issued - Whether Customs Code and Implementing Regulations require this - Yes - Whether a substantial procedural defect - Yes - Appeal allowed - Council Reg (EC) No.2022/95 - Council Reg 384/96 art 2B(9) - Council Reg 2913/92 arts 29-33 - and Implementing Reg art 181a
Case: C00115 (Adobe PDF file size 80kb)
Appellant: VTI Fertasco Ltd
Respondent:
CUSTOMS DUTY - ANTI-DUMPING DUTY - Russian Ammonium nitrate - Russian urea - Net cif price, Community frontier before customs clearance - Whether prices declared by importer were net cif prices - Appeal allowed - Demand quashed
Case: C00114 (Adobe PDF file size 75kb)
Appellant: Smithkline Beecham PLC
Respondent:
CUSTOMS DUTY - Binding tariff information - classification of Niquitin CQ nicotine patch - whether medicament under heading 3004 or chemical product under heading 3824 - held medicament - effect of World Customs Organization opinion for similar product under heading 3824 - binding tariff information quashed but decision not substituted.
