The Commission rejected the application of the participant: the names of a number of goods differed from the names in the documentation. The requirement of their compliance contained instructions for filling out the application.
The Supervisory authority and the courts found the rejection of the application unlawful. The requirement that the name of the goods in the application must repeat the name in the documentation can only be recommendatory.
It is not necessary to reject the application of the participant, if the proposed characteristics meet the requirements of the documentation, but only the name of the goods differs
Document: Definition of the Supreme Court of 24.07.2018 in the case of N A23-6045/2017