law://eu/cjeu/1973/c-183-73/hd_1_1_2@2026-11-12The Osram Company assert that the English and French versions of the tariff headings support their view that the articles to be classified, the reflector bulbs (reflectors) and covering glasses (lenses), must be classified as bulbs pursuant to tariff heading No 70.11. The reflector bulb and the covering glass are obviously complementary items making up the glass part of electric filament lamps. These two units are normally presented at the same time for customs clearance.The French and German wordings of tariff heading No 70.11 refer to ‘ampoules et tubes electriques ouverts, non finis’note (“open, unfinished electric bulbs and tubes”). The definition of the articles offered by the English wording is a great deal wider as it uses the term “glass envelopes”. The three wordings are agreed on the fact that such articles (Kolben/ampoules/glass envelopes/bulbs) must be concerned in the manufacture of “electric lamps and tubes and other similar articles”. The decisive yardstick is not therefore the shape of these articles of glass, but solely the fact that they form the glass envelope of electric lamps.There is no doubt that the articles are used in the manufacture of lamps as electric filament lamp units. If, therefore, the Company's view is without substance, the articles in dispute must thereupon be classified as “electric filament lamp units” (No 85.20), since only articles of glass under heading No 70.11 (bulbs/Kolben and glass envelopes) are included under this heading pursuant to the explanatory Note 1 (b) to Chapter 85. Further transfer from No 85.20 to No 70.21, on the basis of tariff heading No 70.11 (other articles of glass), is not permissible.According to the Company, the definition of glass bulbs under tariff heading No 70.11 must follow from the utilization for which they are normally intended. The concepts in combination of “glass bulbs”, “open”, “unfinished” and “glass envelopes” enable it to be determined that the extent to which a bulb is finished cannot in itself have any bearing on its classification.The Commission points out that the first two questions deal with the interpretation of tariff heading No 70.11. The problem of interpretation that arises comes down to deciding whether, when the glass envelope of a lamp is formed by the combination of several units welded to each other, reflectors and lenses in the present case, the concept of bulbs should apply solely to the envelope in its completed state or whether it may also extend to cover each unit considered separately or at least to some of them.In accordance with the general rules for interpreting CCT nomenclature, the precise wording of tariff heading No. 70.11 should first of all be taken into account. The Commission makes particular reference to the English version of this heading: “Glass envelopes (including bulbs and tubes) for electric lamps, electronic valves or the like”.It subsequently refers to the Explanatory Notes to the Brussels nomenclature and quotes the Notes relating to tariff heading No 70.11.It holds that the notes clearly, if not expressly, define the objective characteristics and properties to be used as yardsticks for classifying goods under tariff heading No 70.11. Without reference to the materials that go to make up these goods, such characteristics essentially lie in the intention to use the said goods for the manufacture of electric lamps and tubes. The English wording of this heading is quite clear in this respect. The heading covers all glass envelopes “for electric lamps, electronic valves or the like”. On the other hand, however, the wording of the tariff heading No 70.11 and the related explanatory Notes clearly show that this is intended to apply only to items that can in themselves compose the glass envelope of the lamps, the manufacture of which they are intended to serve. The Commission states inter alia that the Explanatory Notes to the Brussels nomenclature refer to “bulbs as such”.To rank for classification under tariff heading No 70.11, an item should therefore in itself be able, once it has been fitted with the necessary devices to transform electrical power into light or other rays, to fulfil the role played by the glass envelope in the lamp or valve for the manufacture of which it is intended.In this context, the Commission refers to the classification adopted by the Customs Cooperation Council with regard to tariff heading No 85.21 (cf. Collected Classifications, page M. J. 1971, 70.13-70.21).The Commission further wonders whether bulb parts can be ranked with fully made-up bulbs under tariff heading No 70.11. This is what the second of the questions put by the Bundesfinanzhof amounts to.It appears from the concept of ‘open, unfinished bulbs’ that a bulb or tubular glass envelope for lamps would fall under tariff heading No 70.11 even if it were only an incomplete article compared with the glass envelopes to which this heading refers or has still to undergo various processes towards this end. This is subject to one condition, however: in line with a classification rule generally adopted when applying the Common Customs Tariff, an incomplete or unfinished article must, as imported, bear the essential characteristics of the complete or finished article if it is to be included under the same tariff heading as the latter (cf. General Rule 2 (a) for the interpretation of the nomenclature of the CCT). It is also obvious that in the possible event of a bulb being made up by assembling various glass units, each of which is of equal importance though none of which yet possesses the essential characteristics of the bulb to be produced, none of such units can be included under tariff heading No 70.11. The concept of unfinished bulbs should not be confused with that of parts of bulbs. This is evident from the general composition of the CCT and the terminology that it employs. As regards the Brussels nomenclature, the CCT draws a clear distinction between incomplete or unfinished articles and parts or separate components of articles. Wherever it is intended that the tariff should refer to parts or separate components of an article as well as to the article itself it is ensured that this is stated in express terms.Unless referred to in this way, a part of an article must be allotted to its proper place in the nomenclature and where no specific heading exists to cover it it must be classified under the residual heading relating to the finished article. In fact, this is the principle that the Customs Cooperation Council has adopted in a number of formal classifications (cf. e.g. Collected Classifications, page M. J. 1966, 73.11-73.13). In this context, the Commission further refers to the Explanatory Notes to the Customs Tariff of the European Communities relating to subheadings Nos 85.20-C (85.20-D before 1 January 1972) and 85.21-E. These Notes distinguish clearly between, on the one hand, glass envelopes (including bulbs and tubes) for electric lamps and electronic valves, as under No 70.11, and, on the other hand, other articles of glass intended to form such envelopes, which they allocate to No 70.21However, the Commission draws attention to a new General Rule 2 (a) of the CCT for the interpretation of nomenclature, added to Regulation No 1/72 of the Council of 20 December 1971 (OJ L 1 of 1 January 1972, p. 1), by virtue of which any reference to an article in a particular heading of the tariff ‘shall also be taken to include a reference to that article complete or finished … imported unassembled or disassembled’. At the present time it should be asked whether the articles of glass under consideration cannot be considered to be bulbs ‘imported disassembled’ where they are imported at the same time.In any respect, the above findings apply to the period preceeding the entry into force of Regulation No 1/72.As regards the third question, the Commission maintains that the reply to the first part of the alternative is in fact implicit in the comments made above. The goods in question are not covered by tariff heading No 70.11. It should therefore be asked whether they may be classified as parts or separate components of lamps under sub-heading No 85.20-D.If one were to abide strictly by the tariff provisions there would be some temptation to accept this possibility. Subheading No 85.20-D relates to parts and separate components of the lamps under consideration, and draws no distinction on the basis of the nature of such parts or components nor indeed on the basis of whether they are of glass or not. The sole exclusion made is that stated in Note 1 (b) to Chapter 85. This relates to articles of glass under heading No 70.11. One cannot, however, but be struck by the illogicality of the result of such a classification. To accept this would be to ignore the relationship existing between tariff heading No 85.20 and tariff heading No 70.11.There are in fact grounds for holding that until they become parts of lamps the articles concerned are initially parts of the bulb of such lamps. It is hard to understand how such parts of bulbs can already be included under tariff heading No 85.20 if the bulbs themselves are not. In fact, the exclusion from Chapter 85 contained in Note 1 (b) of the Chapter must be taken to refer not only to articles under tariff heading No 70.11 but also to units intended to make up such articles, even at a stage of production previous to the process whereby the latter were manufactured.If parts of bulbs are excluded in the same way as the bulbs themselves from sub-heading No 85.20-D this is not to ignore the fact that this subheading covers glass parts as well as parts and separate components of lamps and tubes. But, as the Explanatory Notes to the Customs Tariff of the European Communities show, only ‘glass parts… intended to be fitted inside lamps or tubes’ are concerned in this case.The Explanatory Notes, furthermore, expressly confirm that: ‘on the other hand, this subheading does not cover the following … 1. articles of glass intended to form the envelope of lamps or tubes (No 70.21).’The Commission further refers to the above-mentioned CCT classification relating to tariff heading No 85.21.The Commission concludes that the only tariff heading left under which the articles in question can be classified is the residual one relating to other articles of glass, namely tariff heading No 70.21.After the written procedure had been closed, the oral procedure was commenced on 20 March 1974. The Osram Company was represented by Dr Schweickert and the Commission by its legal adviser, J. Amphoux, assisted by D. Oldekop.In the course of the oral procedure, the Company and the Commission, in response to a question by the Court, stated their views on the importance in the present case of the General Rule No 2 (a), last sentence, for the interpretation of the nomenclature of the CCT, with regard to articles submitted unassembled or disassembled.The Commission draws attention to the fact that this Rule was introduced into the CCT on 1 January 1972. Referring to the Explanatory Notes to the Brussels nomenclature, it maintains that the Rule applies on the assumption that all the articles are imported simultaneously, that the fact that they are imported in an unassembled or disassembled state is due mainly to such reasons as special requirements or ease of packaging or transport and not to manufacturing reasons properly speaking, and finally, that the work of assembling them is one of extreme simplicity.The Commission doubts whether these conditions have been fulfilled in the present case. It considers that the fact that the lenses and reflectors are imported separately is due to the special nature of the manufacturing process. It maintains, furthermore, that the sealing process is much more than a simple matter of assembling the components.In the Commission s opinion, the first sentence of Rule 2 (a) relating to incomplete or unfinished articles is no more than a codification of previous law, while the second sentence relating to articles submitted in an unassembled or disassembled state applies only in respect of certain specific Chapters; also, in 1972, the whole of the CCT was extended.The Osram Company considers that the general rule for interpretation supports its view and that this rule states a position that already existed in law.It demonstrates that for technical reasons the glass envelope has to be divided into two parts and maintains that these two parts constitute a single unit, the bulb unit.The Company refers to the following comment included in the Commission's observations: ‘The characteristics that the article in question must possess in order to fall under tariff heading No 70.11 are determined by the technical requirements for the operation of the said lamp or said tube.’ It considers that this comment supports its own point of view.The Advocate-General presented his opinion at the hearing on 4 April 1974.
Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.