- The court ruled on February 7, 2025, regarding a case involving customs duties and bankruptcy.
- The plaintiff argued that the defendant wrongly failed to provide certain documents, including the complete criminal investigation file, correspondence with the regional director of customs, and documents related to the inspector’s failure to provide documents.
- The court found that the criminal investigation was not the basis for the current case and that the plaintiff should provide any relevant documents.
- The court also found that the documents mentioned in points h to k only related to specific cases and had already been addressed in previous rulings.
- The court saw no reason to doubt the defendant’s statement that all relevant documents had been provided.
- The plaintiff argued that Article 124 of the Customs Act implied that the customs debt was extinguished due to their bankruptcy.
Source: uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl
Note that this post was (partially) written with the help of AI. It is always useful to review the original source material, and where needed to obtain (local) advice from a specialist.
