Adv Gill Nadel, Adv Omer Wagner
At the end of October, a verdict was handed down in which it was decided that in certain circumstances it was possible to hand in a claim filed by foreign companies against a Palestinian importer to the customs agent of the importer, providing it was not possible in practice to hand in the claim in the Palestinian territories.
The verdict was given regarding a claim of two foreign companies against an importer from Hebron, on the grounds of violating the intellectual property rights of imported goods, that were caught by customs. In the end, a verdict against the Palestinian importer was given while an order was issued to destroy the merchandise.
(Judge Benjamin Arnon, Civil claim (center) 28840-11-09 Spin Master Ltd. Et Al. Vs. Sricha Al Yekovia Et Al. verdict from 26/10/10)
Surprisingly, lately, at the end of January, a similar orientated verdict was given, in which the court rejected a claim of a customs agent for not being allowed to receive a claim on behalf of his customer, an importer.
The Facts of the Case and the claims of the parties:
“Mirage” company filed a claim against a Palestinian company and tried to hand it the claim by through its customs agent who handled the delivery. The customs agent refused to accept the claim and wrote to the court that he is not permitted to do so, Since the relations with the Palestinian client were severed approximately two weeks following the handing over of the goods to the client, and before the client received a notice of the hold-up of the goods.
In opposition, Mirage company claimed that the customs agent is permitted to receive the claim on behalf of the importer.
The Court’s Decision:
The court accepted the stance of Mirage company and decided that as long as the customs agent acted on behalf of the importer in handling the goods he should accept claims regarding these goods on his behalf (of the importer).
In addition, it was decided that the customs agent can not decide on his own, arbitrarily, that he is not permitted to accept the claims, instead – the burden of proof in this matter lies on him.
The court added and mentioned that the Supreme Court did not give a verdict on the matter of giving a claim to a customs agent and that there are rulings in both directions:
In the end the customs agent’s claim was rejected and it was ruled that he was permitted to accept the statement of claim on behalf of the importer
C.F. (Civil File) (District Tel Aviv) 2027-08, Mirage Studios Inc. v. Sharikat Abu Aseb Lilalab et al. Verdict on 27.1.11, Judge A. Nahlieli- Hayat. Names of lawyers were not mentioned in the verdict.
עדכוני מכס ורגולציה
