19.7.2008   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 183/10

(1)

Must Article 2(1) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1593/91 (1) of 12 June 1991, read in conjunction with Article 11(1) of the Convention of 14 November 1975 on the International Transport of Goods under Cover of TIR Carnets (TIR Convention), be interpreted as meaning that the period laid down in Article 11(1) of the TIR Convention applies only for the benefit of the guaranteeing organisation, but not for that of the carnet holder, and that exceeding the period of one year from the date of acceptance of the TIR carnet in respect of the carnet holder affects entitlement to recover the customs debt or the excise duties and special excise duties and the liability for payment, and that exceeding the period of one year prejudices the right of the competent customs authorities to proceed to recovery of that debt?

(2)

Must Article 2(2) and (3) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1593/91 of 12 June 1991, read in conjunction with Article 11(1) and (2) of the Convention of 14 November 1975 on the International Transport of Goods under Cover of TIR Carnets (TIR Convention), be interpreted as meaning that the period laid down therein applies only for the furnishing of proof as to the regularity of the transport operation, but not for the furnishing of proof as to the place where the offence or irregularity was committed?

(3)

Must Article 2(2) and (3) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1593/91 of 12 June 1991, read in conjunction with Article 11(1) and (2) of the Convention of 14 November 1975 on the International Transport of Goods under Cover of TIR Carnets (TIR Convention), be interpreted as meaning that, in so far as the period laid down therein also applies for the furnishing of proof as to the place where the offence or irregularity was committed, that period is not a strict period and that the carnet holder may still furnish that proof even after that period has expired?.