ABSTRACT The division between delegated and implementing acts is not only discussed before the Court of Justice of the EU, it is also a matter of debate between the institutions when drafting legislation which mandates the use of either delegated or implementing rule-making. This article uses the example of the Union Customs Code (UCC) to research the distribution of delegated and implementing rule-making powers and their differentiation. The customs regime was recast to account for the changes of Commission acts and is therefore a particularly apt example. The findings show that the delegated and implementing mandates differ in terms of their wording. Delegated rules refer more often to material conditions whereas implementing provisions provide more often for procedural rules. This can in some cases also be seen in the UCC Delegated and Implementing Acts themselves. This situation can be explained by the division of labour in the EU, where implementation and procedural arrangements both are the domain of Member States. However, the Customs Code and its Commission acts also show that such an approach requires a very detailed description of Commission mandates and that it is difficult to determine by its content whether a provision is a material or procedural rule.

中文翻译：

---

寻找秩序：探索欧盟海关法中授权和实施行为的使用

摘要 授权行为和实施行为之间的划分不仅在欧盟法院讨论，而且在起草授权使用授权或实施规则制定的立法时也是机构之间辩论的问题。本文以欧盟海关法典（UCC）为例，研究授权和实施规则制定权的分配及其差异化。海关制度因委员会法案的变化而重新制定，因此是一个特别恰当的例子。调查结果表明，授权和执行任务在措辞上有所不同。委托规则更多地涉及物质条件，而实施条款更多地涉及程序规则。在某些情况下，这也可以在 UCC 授权和实施法案本身中看到。这种情况可以用欧盟的分工来解释，其中实施和程序安排都是成员国的领域。然而，《海关法典》及其委员会法案也表明，这种方法需要对委员会的任务进行非常详细的描述，并且很难通过其内容来确定某项规定是实质性规则还是程序规则。