Judgment — ECLI:EU:C:2017:754
Date: 2017-10-12
Language of the case: German
Court formation: Eighth Chamber
Subject matter: Dumping;External relations;Free movement of goods;Commercial policy;Approximation of laws;Customs Union
Procedure: Reference for a preliminary ruling;Reference for a preliminary ruling - decision unnecessary
Origin: Germany

Summary — Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber), 12 October 2017 Common commercial policy — Protection against dumping — Imposition of anti-dumping duties — Regulation No 412/2013 — Conditions for application — Presentation of a valid commercial invoice — Presentation subsequent to the customs declaration — Lawfulness — Conditions (Council Regulations No 2913/92, as amended by Regulation No 2700/2000, Art. 78, and No 412/2013, Art. 1(3)) Article 1(3) of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 412/2013 of 13 May 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of ceramic tableware and kitchenware originating in the People’s Republic of China must be interpreted as allowing the presentation, after the customs declaration has been made, of a valid commercial invoice, for the purposes of fixing a definitive anti-dumping duty, in the case where all the other preconditions necessary for obtaining a company-specific anti-dumping duty rate are satisfied and compliance with the proper application of the anti-dumping duties is ensured, this being a matter for the referring court to verify. It thus follows from Article 78 of the Customs Code as a whole that it is permissible to present new material which may be taken into consideration by the customs authorities after the customs declaration has been made. The specific logic of that article is to bring the customs procedure into line with the actual situation (see, to that effect, judgment of 10 December 2015, Veloserviss, C‑427/14, EU:C:2015:803, paragraph 26 and the case-law cited). (see paras 31, 39, operative part)