“Juris Ferrum” LF attorneys defended the rights of the Odessa customs broker

“Juris Ferrum” LF attorneys defended the rights of the Odessa customs broker

At the end of 2021, custom’s broker addressed to us, over whom a protocol of violation customs rules under Art. 472 of the Customs Code of Ukraine were issued. She was threatened with a UAH 1 million fine and confiscation of the goods for the same amount. 

Odesa customs claimed that fire extinguishers were imported to Ukraine, not spare parts for them (as it was), and therefore the client incorrectly identified the product code.

Адвокати АО «ЮРІС ФЕРРУМ» захистили права одеської митної брокерки

Despite similar spare parts were declared many times without claims. But this time the customs drew up a Protocol and confiscated the goods. 

“Juris Ferrum” LF customs attorneys proved non-existence of administrative offense in customs broker’s actions

The two courts listened intently to our arguments and opponents' objections. 

We were a real pain in the front with our theme the fire extinguisher. 

Confirming the legitimacy of the client's actions, our customs attorneys provided to the court:

  • shipping documents;
  • contract specifications;
  • export declaration;
  • calculation documents and price list;
  • payment orders. 

In all these documents was clearly stated that the goods are spare parts for fire extinguishers. 

Expert opinions of the Odessa regional Chamber of Commerce and Industry became additional evidence. 

The client clearly determined the product description and code in accordance with the shipping documents, which excludes her fault. LF “Juris Ferrum” attorneys proved that no damage was caused, and this became an additional argument in client’s favor. 

In the trial we actually demonstrated that it is impossible to assemble an entire fire extinguisher from imported spare parts. 

We must do anything to win. 

Decision of the trial court was obtained a few days before a full-scale war, and the response to the appeal of the Odesa Customs was already written in air raid drills. 

The client's rights were protected contrary to active military actions. 

More case information by link.