Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Article 30 [Prohibition of New Customs Duties or Charges Having Equivalent Effect]

(ex-Article 25 TEC)

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – A Commentary

Part of the book series: Springer Commentaries on International and European Law ((SCIEL))

  • 1885 Accesses

Abstract

The concept for gradual abolishing of customs duties and charges having equivalent effect between the MS was first introduced by the 1957 EEC Treaty. This supports the free movement of goods that is the foundation and very core of today’s EU. Following the ECSC, the succeeding customs union and a common customs strategy provide a foundation for the proper functioning of the utmost goal establishing Single Market that applies common rules at internal and external borders. In addition to the ideal of a customs union leading to a Single Market, the common European market sought to carry into effect a stable producing and trading union, fostering a strong dynamic plateau capable of entering into relations with the US and Japanese blooming economies. Seeking to establish a fully functional customs union at the time, the TEEC and more specifically, its Article 12 mark the beginning of the gradual elimination of customs duties as financial obstacles to trade between the MS benefitting the producers, consumers, and the Union at a larger scale, alike.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 229.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    Foster (2011), p. 265.

  2. 2.

    Article 12 TEEC: “Member States shall refrain from introducing between themselves any new customs duties on imports or exports or any charges having equivalent effect, and from increasing those which they already apply in their trade with each other.”

  3. 3.

    Council Decision No 66/532 concerning the abolition of customs duties, the prohibition of quantitative restrictions as between Member States and the application of the common customs tariff duties for products other than those set out in Annex II to the Treaty, O.J. 2971/66

  4. 4.

    Craig and de Búrca (2011), p. 612.

  5. 5.

    Ortino (2004), p. 41.

  6. 6.

    See, for instance, Craig and de Búrca (2011), p. 611.

  7. 7.

    Ortino (2004), p. 40. Dr. Frederico Ortino, who is an international economic law expert, sees in his book on Basic Legal Instruments for the Liberalisation of Trade that the dealing with pecuniary border measures can be done by drawing a distinction between three main features of (a) normative content, (b) objective element and (c) the exceptions.

  8. 8.

    Ortino (2004), p. 47.

  9. 9.

    Case 26/62, Van Gend en Loos (ECJ 5 February 1963).

  10. 10.

    Foster (2011), p. 265.

  11. 11.

    The absolute nature of the fundamental principle to eliminate customs duties and charges having equivalent effect between the MS has been indisputable in various EU case law ever since coming into effect of former Article 12 TEEC. See, for instance: Joined Cases 2-3/62, Commission v Luxembourg and Belgium (ECJ 14 December 1962); Joined Cases 80-81/77, Société Les Commissionnaires Réunis SARL v Receveur des douanes (ECJ 20 April 1978).

  12. 12.

    Case 26/62, Van Gend en Loos (ECJ 5 February 1963).

  13. 13.

    Snell (2002), pp. 138–139.

  14. 14.

    Case C-16/94, Edouard Dubois v Garanor Exploitation SA (ECJ 11 August 1995) para 19–21.

  15. 15.

    Snell (2002), pp. 138–139.

  16. 16.

    Barents (1978), p. 416.

  17. 17.

    Joined Cases 2-3/62, Commission v Luxembourg and Belgium (ECJ 14 December 1962); followed by, for instance, Case 7/68, Commission v Italy (ECJ 10 December 1968); Case 24/68, Commission v Italy (ECJ 1 July 1969); see also Case 87/75, Bresciani (ECJ 5 February 1976); Joined Cases 2-3/69, Diamantarbaiders (ECJ 1 July 1969) ECR 211.

  18. 18.

    Joined Cases 2-3/62, Commission v Luxembourg and Belgium (ECJ 14 December 1962), p. 432.

  19. 19.

    Barents (1978), p. 417.

  20. 20.

    Craig and de Búrca (2011), p. 614.

  21. 21.

    Case 7/68, Commission v Italy (ECJ 10 December 1968), p. 429.

  22. 22.

    Case 7/68, Commission v Italy (ECJ 10 December 1968).

  23. 23.

    Joined Cases 2-3/69, Diamantarbaiders (ECJ 1 July 1969).

  24. 24.

    Case 7/68, Commission v Italy (ECJ 10 December 1968) para 9; Joined Cases 2-3/69, Diamantarbaiders (ECJ 1 July 1969) para 11/14.

  25. 25.

    Joined Cases 2-3/69, Diamantarbaiders (ECJ 1 July 1969) para 11/14.

  26. 26.

    Joined Cases 2-3/69, Diamantarbaiders (ECJ 01 July 1969) para 15/18.

  27. 27.

    In addition to the aforementioned cases in given section, for example Case 87/75, Bresciani (ECJ 5 February 1976); Case 63/74, W. Cadsky S.p.A. v. Istituto Nazionale per il Commercio Estero (ECJ 26 February1975).

  28. 28.

    Case 7/68, Commission v Italy (ECJ 10 December 1968) p. 429.

  29. 29.

    Craig and de Búrca (2011), pp. 613–614.

  30. 30.

    Craig and de Búrca (2011), p. 616.

  31. 31.

    Case 87/75, Bresciani (ECJ 5 February 1976) para 10–11.

  32. 32.

    Case 87/75, Bresciani (ECJ 5 February 1976) para 11.

  33. 33.

    Case 18/87, Commission v Germany (ECJ 27 September 1988) para 6.

  34. 34.

    Case 132/78, Denkavit v France (ECJ 31 May 1979).

  35. 35.

    Case 158/82, Commission v Denmark (ECJ 9 November 1983).

  36. 36.

    Case 46/76, Bauhuis v Netherlands (ECJ 25 January 1977).

  37. 37.

    Case 90/79, Commission v France (ECJ 3 February 1981).

  38. 38.

    Case 193/85, Cooperativa Co-Frutta Srl v Amministrazione delle finanze dello Stato (ECJ 3 June 1986).

References

  • Barents, R. (1978). Charges having an equivalent effect to customs duties. Common Market Law Review, 15(4), 415–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craig, P., & De Búrca, G. (2011). EU law, text, cases and materials (5th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Foster, N. (2011). Foster on EU law (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ortino, F. (2004). Basic legal instruments for the liberalisation of trade: A comparative analysis of EC and WTO law. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snell, J. (2002). Goods and services in EC law. A study of the relationship between the freedoms. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn, Estonia

    Tanel Kerikmäe

  2. Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications, Tallinn, Estonia

    Sandra Särav

Authors
  1. Tanel Kerikmäe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sandra Särav
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Tanel Kerikmäe or Sandra Särav .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty for Economics, Law and Social Science, University of Erfurt, Erfurt, Germany

    Hermann-Josef Blanke

  2. Università degli Studi di Teramo, Teramo, Italy

    Stelio Mangiameli

List of Cases

List of Cases

  • ECJ 14.12.1962, 2-3/62, Commission v Luxembourg and Belgium, ECR 425 [cit. in para 4, 7]

  • ECJ 05.02.1963, 26/62, Van Gend en Loos, ECR 13 [cit. in para 4]

  • ECJ 20.04.1978, 80-81/77, Société Les Commissionnaires Réunis SARL v Receveur des douanes, ECR 927 [cit. in para 4]

  • ECJ 10.12.1968, 7/68, Commission v Italy, ECR 423 [cit. in para 7, 8, 9]

  • ECJ 01.07.1969, 24/68, Commission v Italy, ECR 193 [cit. in para 7]

  • ECJ 01.07.1969, 2-3/69, Diamantarbaiders, ECR 211 [cit. in para 8]

  • ECJ 26.02.1975, 63/74, W. Cadsky S.p.A. v Istituto Nazionale per il Commercio Estero, ECR 281 [cit in para 9]

  • ECJ 05.02.1976, 87/75, Bresciani, ECR 129 [cit. in para 7, 9]

  • ECJ 25.01.1977, 46/76, Bauhuis v Netherlands, ECR 5 [cit. in para 10]

  • ECJ 31.05.1979, 132/78, Denkavit v France, ECR 1923 [cit. in para 10]

  • ECJ 03.02.1981, 90/79, Commission v France, ECR 283 [cit. in para 11]

  • ECJ 09.11.1983, 158/82 Commission v Denmark, ECR 3573 [cit. in para 10].

  • ECJ 03.06.1986, 193/85, Cooperativa Co-Frutta Srl v Amministrazione delle finanze dello Stato, ECR 2085 131 [cit. in para 11]

  • ECJ 27.09.1988, 18/87, Commission v Germany, ECR 5427 [cit. in para 10]

  • ECJ 11.08.1995, C-16/94, Edouard Dubois v Garanor Exploitation SA, ECR I-2421 [cit. in para 5]

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kerikmäe, T., Särav, S. (2021). Article 30 [Prohibition of New Customs Duties or Charges Having Equivalent Effect]. In: Blanke, HJ., Mangiameli, S. (eds) Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – A Commentary. Springer Commentaries on International and European Law. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43511-0_31

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-43511-0_31

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-43509-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-43511-0

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation