Application of the Principle of Legal Certainty to Legal Relations in the field of Customs by the Court of Justice of the European Union and the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union

The principle of legal certainty, according to which the established rules should allow interested parties to clearly understand the scope of the obligations imposed on them, has found wide application in the practice of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU Court) on customs legal relations. The CJEU and the EAEU Court not only use this principle as an additional method of argumentation, but also as an independent basis for monitoring the legality of secondary law acts adopted by the bodies of these integration associations. As the analysis of the practice of the CJEU shows, this principle has two main aspects: material, expressed in the requirement of clarity of the act, and temporal, associated primarily with the prohibition of retroactive effect of the EU act. At the same time, within the framework of the material aspect, the EU Court draws attention not only to the absence of internal contradictions in the act, but also to compliance with the requirement to publish the act and to indicate the legal framework. In the practice of the EAEU Court (and earlier the EurAsEC Court) on customs legal relations, compliance with the principle of legal certainty is checked in terms of clarity and consistency of the Commission’s decisions. As the practice of the EAEU Court devoted to the classification of certain types of goods shows, a violation of these requirements may be a consequence of both the confusion in the content of one classification decision of classification features characteristic of different commodity items, and the absence in the classification decision of the necessary classification features that allow distinguishing the goods subject to classification in different commodity items. In these cases, non-compliance with the requirement of legal certainty serves as an unconditional basis for recognizing the Commission’s decisions as inconsistent with the law of the Union.

1. Dyachenko EB. Dokazyvanie pri rassmotrenii Sudom Evraziyskogo ekonomicheskogo soyuza del v oblasti tamozhennykh pravootnosheniy [Evidence during consideration by the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union of cases in the field of customs legal relations]. Vestnik Rossiyskoy tamozhennoy akademii [Vestnik of Russian Customs Academy]. 2022;3:45-56. (In Russ.).

2. Dyachenko EB, Entin KV. Rol konsultativnykh zaklyucheniy. Suda EES v razvitii prava konkurentsii Evraziyskogo ekonomicheskogo soyuza [The role of advisory opinions. The EAEU Courts in the development of competition law of the Eurasian Economic Union]. Pravo. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki [Law. Journal of the Higher School of Economics]. 2021;13(4):177-204. (In Russ.).

3. Chayka KL. Pravovaya opredelennost kak kriteriy deystvitelnosti resheniy o klassifikatsii otdelnykh vidov tovarov v integratsionnykh obedineniyakh [Legal certainty as a criterion for the validity of decisions on the classification of certain types of goods in integration associations]. Vestnik Rossiyskoy tamozhennoy akademii [Vestnik of Russian Customs Academy]. 2022;1:59-67. (In Russ.).

4. Entin K. Obshchie printsipy prava integratsionnykh obedineniy kak taynoe oruzhie Suda ES i Suda EES [General principles of the law of integration associations as a secret weapon of the EU Court and the EAEU Court]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie [International justice]. 2022;2(42):64-83. (In Russ.).

5. Ahmetaj H. Legal certainty and legitimate expectation in the EU Law. Interdisciplinary Journal of Research and Development «Alexander Moisiu» University, Durrës, Albania. 2014;I(2):20-25.

6. Chalmers D, Davies G, Monti G. European Union law: text and materials. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2010.

7. Lang J. Legal Certainty and Legitimate Expectations. General Principles of European Community Law: Reports from a Conference in Malmö, 27–28, August 1999: Organised by the Swedish Network for European Legal Studies and the Faculty of Law, University of Lund. Bernitz U, Nergelius J, editors. Kluwer Law International; 2006. Pp. 163–184.

8. Schermers HG, Waelbroeck DF. Judicial Protection in the European Union. 6th ed. The Hague: Kluwer Law International; 2001.

9. Tridimas T. The General Principles of EU Law. Oxford University Press; 2006.

10. Van Meerbeeck J. The Principle of Legal Certainty in the Case Law of the European Court of Justice: From Certainty to Trust. European Law Review. 2016;41(2):275-288.