Action brought on 25 August 2006 - RSA Security Ireland v Commission

(Case T-227/06)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: RSA Security Ireland Ltd (Shannon, Ireland) (represented by: B. Conway, Barrister and S. Daly, Solicitor)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

Annul Commission Regulation (EC) No 888/2006 of 16 June 2006 as it fails to classify the applicant's product for tariff classification purposes under the Combined Nomenclature by reference to the objective characteristics and qualities of the product.

In the alternative, annul Commission Regulation (EC) No 888/2006 as it was enacted by the Commission on foot of an abuse of powers by the Commission and/or an infringement of essential procedural requirements.

Declare that the customs classification of the product is to be determined pursuant to the intrinsic characteristic of the product which is that it is in the nature of an automatic data processing machine and so falls to be classified within the terms of chapter 8471 of the Combined Nomenclature.

In the alternative, declare that the essential characteristic of the product is its specific capacity to generate and perform mathematical calculations specified by the user at the time of purchase and that is so falls to be classified as a calculating device within the terms of chapter 8470 of the Combined Nomenclature.

Declare that in accordance with the accepted classification rules of goods for Community customs purposes the essential characteristic of the product is not that of a security device or the granting of access to records whether stored on an automatic data processing machine or otherwise.

Order the payment to the applicant of such customs duty as has been paid by the applicant in respect of the importation of the product into the Community since the coming into force of Commission Regulation (EC) No 888/2006 together with the payment of interest to the applicant.

Order the Commission to pay the applicant's costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant is importing and selling the product "RSA SecurID authenticator" in the Community. The company seeks the annulment of Commission Regulation No 888/2006 ¹ by which this product was classified under heading 8543 in the Combined Nomenclature.

The applicant contends that, in enacting Regulation No 888/2006, the Commission has failed to identify the essential characteristics of the product and it has misdescribed the product as "a security device" and as a device "[which] allows the user access to the records stored on an ADP machine" in the description of the goods in the annex to Regulation No 888/2006. The applicant alleges that these failures are errors of law which should lead to the annulment of the regulation.

____________

¹ - Commission Regulation (EC) No 888/2006 of 16 June 2006 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature (OJ 2006 L 165, p. 6).