Judgment_paragraph (2) · 137/78

(2)The United Kingdom states explicitly that its observations refer to the first question submitted by the Netherlands court, and recalls that, although the Common Customs Tariff was not fully applicable by the United Kingdom at the time when the transactions in dispute took place, it nevertheless applied the nomenclature contained in the tariff in accordance with Article 39 (4) of the Act of Accession.In the opinion of the United Kingdom a mixture containing only 50 % of egg powder and including in addition substantial quantities of soya meal, glucose syrup and a smaller proportion of lecithin cannot be considered as coming under heading 04.05 or subheading 04.05 B I (a) 1.According to the United Kingdom the products in question are goods referred to in subheading 21.07 G and, having regard to the Rules for the Interpretation of the Nomenclature of the Common Customs Tariff, should be classified under that subheading.This view is furthermore supported by the Explanatory Notes of the Customs Co-operation Council on heading 21.07 which, in accordance with the judgment of the Court of 8 December 1970 in Case 14/70 (Deutsche Bakels GmbH [1970] ECR 1001) must be applied in interpreting the nomenclature of the Common Customs Tariff, in particular, where the tariff does not itself contain any explanatory note with regard to a specific heading.The Explanatory Notes to the Customs Tariff of the European Communities do not mention, with regard to the two subheadings in question, mixtures such as the products at issue but the note to subheading 04.05 B I states that that subheading applies to whole eggs or yolks not in shell if they are preserved by the addition of small quantities of specified chemicals. It does not state that all mixtures containing whole eggs or yolks should come under that subheading.