Annulment of a customs fine due to failure to comply with the lawful imposition procedure
With the aforementioned court decisions, it was held that, for the lawful reasoning of an act imposing customs charges—in this case—, the full content of the Service’s report must be made available to the Greek customs authorities prior to the issuance of the act, while the mere transmission of information regarding the commission of customs infringements in imports to Greece is not sufficient. The Administrative Court of First Instance of Thessaloniki ruled that only if the report forms part of the administrative file before the issuance of the act can the lawful exercise of the right to be heard beforehand be ensured, as this requires that all evidence on which the imposition of customs charges is based be disclosed to the importers.
The same right is also violated when the audit report of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), although included in the administrative file prior to the issuance of the act imposing additional customs charges, is drafted in a foreign language and is not accompanied by a translation into Greek. As held, the absence of a translation deprives the importer of the goods of the ability to invoke their legitimate expectations and to be exempted from the additional charges.
Notably, the Court rejected the argument of the customs authority that the interested party could have translated the report by their own means. By adopting this position, the Court accepts that the documents of the administrative file must be drafted in Greek; otherwise, it is considered that the interested party cannot obtain full and adequate knowledge of them. This, evidently, applies to any procedure involving the imposition of a penalty or fine by an auditing authority.
What is ο OLAF (European Anti-Fraud Office)?
The European Anti-Fraud Office is responsible for conducting investigations into cases of fraud and corruption related to European funds. Its duties also include investigating cases in which a country of origin different from the actual one is falsely declared to the competent customs authorities, in order to avoid financial charges upon the importation of goods.
The Office is competent to carry out the relevant investigations; however, it is not empowered to impose the additional charges itself when violations concerning the declaration of the origin of goods are identified. This responsibility lies with the customs authorities of the EU Member States, to which the Office’s audit reports are submitted. Based on the findings of these reports, the national authorities apply the applicable provisions and issue acts imposing the customs charges.
Customs authorities and the procedure for imposing customs fines
In cases where audit reports of the Office are transmitted to the Greek customs authorities, establishing that violations were committed during the importation of goods into Greece, those authorities are required to issue the prescribed acts imposing customs chargeswhile, of course, following the formal requirements and complying with the obligations provided under Greek law for the issuance of adverse administrative acts, such as, in particular, the prior hearing of the interested party and the full and clear reasoning of the acts. In the two cases handled by our law firm, the fines and other charges initially imposed on the companies that imported the goods were annulled by the Court due to the customs authorities’ failure to comply with these obligations.