The applicant, SIA Kurcums Metal, brought proceedings for the annulment of the decision of the Valsts ieņēmumu dienests (the Latvian tax administration), requiring it to pay definitive anti-dumping duties, import duties and value added tax in relation to the import from Russia into Latvia, for release for free circulation, of certain iron or steel ropes and cables. The Augstākās tiesas Senāts (Supreme Court of Latvia) referred to the ECJ the questions: (i) whether the Combined Nomenclature (“CN”) subheading 5607 49 11 in 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 (OJ 1987 L256, p 1) must be interpreted as meaning that cables such as those at issue in the main proceedings, which consist of both polypropylene and wound steel thread, fall as such within that subheading; (ii) whether general rule 3(b) for the interpretation of the CN must be interpreted as meaning that the tariff classification of cables such as those at issue in the main proceedings is to be carried out pursuant to that rule; (iii) whether Article 1 of Regulation No 1601/2001 must be interpreted as meaning that cables such as those at issue in the main proceedings, on the assumption that they are covered by CN subheading 7312 10 98, fall within the scope of that provision; and (iv) whether CN subheading 7317 00 90 must be interpreted as meaning that corrugated clips with rounded tips connected by means of a pin, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, fall within that subheading.
The Court held that: (i) subheading 5607 49 11 of the Combined Nomenclature in 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, as amended, must be interpreted as meaning that cables such as those at issue in the main proceedings, which consist of both polypropylene and wound steel thread, do not fall as such within that subheading; (ii) general rule 3(b) for the interpretation of the Combined Nomenclature in Annex I to Regulation No 2658/87 must be interpreted as meaning that the tariff classification of cables such as those at issue in the main proceedings is not to be carried out pursuant to that rule, subject to verification by the referring court, in the light of all the elements of fact placed before it, that neither of the two materials of which those cables are composed in itself gives those cables their essential character; (iii) article 1 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1601/2001 of 2 August 2001 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and definitively collecting the provisional anti-dumping duty imposed on imports of certain iron or steel ropes and cables originating in the Czech Republic, Russia, Thailand and Turkey must be interpreted as meaning that cables such as those at issue in the main proceedings, on the assumption that they are covered by subheading 7312 10 98 of the Combined Nomenclature in Annex I to Regulation No 2658/87 fall within the scope of that provision; and (iv) subheading 7317 00 90 of the Combined Nomenclature in Annex I to Regulation No 2658/87, as amended by Regulation No 1549/2006, must be interpreted as meaning that corrugated clips with rounded tips connected by means of a pin, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, do not fall within that subheading.