Kautabak und Schnupftabak (über die Nase konsumierter Tabak)

A.K. and „Tabako lapai“ UAB v Lietuvos Respublikos generalinė prokuratūra

On those grounds, LE TRIBUNAL (Second Chamber, sitting with five Judges) hereby rules: 1. Article 5(1)(a) of Council Directive 2011/64/EU of 21 June 2011 on the structure and rates of excise duty applied to manufactured tobacco must be interpreted as meaning that in order to classify a product as ‘smoking tobacco’, within the meaning of that provision, it is not necessary to rely on the tariff headings of the Combined Nomenclature set out in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 254/2000 of 31 January 2000, in the version resulting from Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1925 of 12 October 2017, and on the Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union. 2. The examination of the aspects to which the third question relates has disclosed no factor of such a kind as to affect the validity of Directive 2011/64, Implementing Regulation 2017/1925 and the Explanatory Notes to the CN in view of the general principle of legal certainty and the principle that offences and penalties must be defined by law, enshrined by Article 49(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Półtorak Hesse Steinfatt Petrlík Dimitrakopoulos Delivered in open court in Luxembourg on 15 April 2026. [Signatures] * Language of the case: Lithuanian.

UAB „Skonis ir kvapas“ v Muitinės departamentas prie Lietuvos Respublikos finansų ministerijos

On those grounds, the Court (Eighth Chamber) hereby rules: Articles 2 and 5 of Council Directive 2011/64/EU of 21 June 2011 on the structure and rates of excise duty applied to manufactured tobacco must be construed as meaning that water-pipe tobacco, consisting of tobacco, which makes up 24% thereof, and other substances such as sugar syrup, glycerine, flavourings and preservative, must be regarded as a product ‘consisting … in part of substances other than tobacco’ and as ‘smoking tobacco’ within the meaning of those provisions and must therefore be regarded, in its entirety and irrespective of the substances other than tobacco contained therein, as smoking tobacco subject to the excise duty on tobacco. [Signatures] ( *1 ) Language of the case: Lithuanian.