Council Regulation (EC) No 1754/2004 of 4 October 2004 amending Regulation (EC) No 176/2000 amending Regulation (EC) No 1015/94 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of television camera systems originating in Japan
Date: 2004-10-04
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: Japan, anti-dumping duty, originating product, recording equipment

12.10.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 313/1

I

(Acts whose publication is obligatory)

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 1754/2004

of 4 October 2004

amending Regulation (EC) No 176/2000 amending Regulation (EC) No 1015/94 imposing a definitive
anti-dumping duty on imports of television camera systems originating in Japan

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty
Community,

establishing the European

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22
December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from
countries not members of the European Community (1)
(the
‘basic Regulation’),

Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commission
after consulting the Advisory Committee,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

(3)

A. PREVIOUS PROCEDURE

The Council, by Regulation (EC) No 1015/94 (2), imposed
a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of television
camera systems (‘TCS’) originating in Japan. The Council
subsequently confirmed the definitive anti-dumping duty
by Regulation (EC) No 2042/2000 (3), in accordance with
Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation.

the Council

In Article 1(3)(e) of Regulation (EC) No 1015/94 and
Regulation (EC) No 2042/2000 (‘the definitive Regu-
lations’),
specifically excluded from the
scope of the anti-dumping duty camera systems which
are listed in the Annex to the definitive Regulations (‘the
Annex’),
camera
representing high-end professional
systems technically falling within the product definition
under Article 1(2) of
the definitive Regulations, but
which cannot be regarded as television camera systems.

(‘Ikegami’),

One exporting producer, namely Ikegami Tsushinki Co.
Ltd.
received by the
requested by letter,
to add certain new
Commission on 15 April 1999,
models of professional camera systems including their
accessories to the Annex and thus to exempt
them
from the scope of the anti-dumping duties. In January

(1) OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation

(EC) No 461/2004 (OJ L 77, 13.3.2004, p. 12).

(2) OJ L 111, 30.4.1994, p. 106. Regulation as last amended by Regu-

lation (EC) No 176/2000 (OJ L 22, 27.1.2000, p. 29).

(3) OJ L 244, 29.9.2000, p. 38. Regulation as last amended by Regu-

lation (EC) No 825/2004 (OJ L 127, 29.4.2004, p. 12).

2000, the Council by Regulation (EC) No 176/2000 (4)
(the ‘amending Regulation’) granted this request and
amended Regulation (EC) No 1015/94 accordingly.
In
accordance with Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No
176/2000, this amendment entered into force the day
following that of its publication in the Official Journal of
the European Communities, i.e. 28 January 2000.

B. PRESENT EXAMINATION

The Community Institutions received information that it
would be appropriate to apply the amending Regulation,
in so far as it amended the Annex to Regulation (EC) No
1015/94 retroactively.

Indeed, one exporting producer, namely Ikegami had to
pay the definitive anti-dumping duty for all exports of its
professional camera systems subject
to the amending
Regulation but made prior to the date of entry into
force of this Regulation, i.e. prior to 28 January 2000,
although these models have subsequently been exempted
from the duty in accordance with Article 1(3)(e) of the
definitive Regulations.

the

context,

exporting producer

concerned
In this
referred also to the prior practice of the Community
Institutions, according to which an amendment of the
Annex was generally applied retroactively to the date
the
the request whenever appropriate. Therefore,
of
the
that
concerned
exporting
amendment of
to the amending
Regulation should be applied from the date of receipt
by
for
exemption from the definitive duty, i.e. 15 April 1999
the
in accordance with the
Community Institutions.

consistent practice of

the Commission of

the Annex pursuant

producer

relevant

claimed

request

the

The Commission examined whether the retroactive appli-
the amending Regulation would indeed be
cation of
appropriate. In this respect it was first considered that
all professional camera models mentioned in recital (5)
have
camera
indeed been qualified as professional
systems. In accordance with Article 1(3)(e) of the defi-
nitive Regulations these cameras are exempted from the
definitive anti-dumping duty by virtue of their inclusion
in the Annex.

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(4) OJ L 22, 27.1.2000, p. 29.

L 313/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

12.10.2004

(8)

(9)

(10)

is noted that a professional camera system falling
It
within Article 1(3)(e) of
the definitive Regulations is
exempted, from the date it has been explicitly included
in the Annex by way of amending the definitive Regu-
it is
lations, from the definitive duty.
assumed that exporting producers know in advance, i.e.
prior to any first exportation into the Community, their
cycles of production and whether their new models
should qualify as professional
cameras within the
meaning of Article 1(3)(e), and consequently whether
they should be included in the Annex and an application
to that effect be made.

In this context,

intention that

Notwithstanding the above, it was not in the Community
Institutions'
the definitive anti-dumping
duty be applicable to imports of professional camera
systems which are eventually found to be exemptible
from this duty by the application of Article 1(3)(e).
Therefore, where appropriate, the necessity for a retro-
active application of a Regulation exempting certain
professional camera models has been recognised from
such a request, which
the date of
allowed
properly
to
the classifications. This was
monitor the accuracy of
the
camera
models have been imported in the Community prior to
the entering into force of the Regulation amending the
Annex but after the date of the exemption request.

in particular, where professional

the Community

the receipt of

institutions

case,

effect with the Commission.

In the present case, it was shown that Ikegami imported
certain professional camera systems, prior to the publi-
cation of the amending Regulation, but after it lodged its
exemption request, which have
subsequently been
exempted by the application of Article 1(3)(e) of the
definitive Regulations. The amending Regulation entered
into force the day after its publication, i.e. on 28 January
2000. However, as mentioned above, it has not been in
the Community Institutions' intention that the definitive
anti-dumping duties apply to camera systems which are
found to be exemptible after a request has been lodged
the
to that
Commission,
the
definitive measures and the creation of the first Annex
in 1994, actually informed the exporting producers
concerned that
is intended to reimburse definitive
anti-dumping duties paid for imports of professional
camera systems eventually found to be falling under
Article 1(3)(e) between a fully documented request for
exemption and the corresponding publication of
the
amended Annex. In this context, it was considered that
the retroactive application of the amending Regulation,
in so far as it amended the Annex to Regulation (EC) No
1015/94 would bring the current situation in line with
the consistent practice of the Community Institutions.

In fact,
immediately after the imposition of

it

the Commission services determination. None of
interested parties objected to the above conclusions.

the

C. CONCLUSION

(12)

Considering the above,
the Community Institutions
concluded that the retroactive application of the Annex
as amended by the amending Regulation is warranted.

(13) Given the above the Annex as amended by Regulation
(EC) No 176/2000 should apply to imports of
the
following professional camera models produced and
exported to the European Community by Ikegami from
the date of receipt by the Commission of the relevant
request for exemption from the definitive anti-dumping
duty for these models, i.e. 15 April 1999:

— camera head HC-400

— camera head HC-400W

— viewfinder VF15-46

— operational control unit RCU-390

— camera adapter CA-400

— camera control unit MA-200A,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 176/2000 shall be replaced by
the following:

‘Article 2

This Regulation shall enter

into force on the day
1.
following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the
European Union.

For the products of Ikegami Tsushinki Co. Ltd.

2.
below, this Regulation shall apply from 15 April 1999:

listed

— camera head HC-400

— camera head HC-400W

— viewfinder VF15-46

— operational control unit RCU-390

— camera adapter CA-400

— camera control unit MA-200A’.

Article 2

(11)

The Community industry and Ikegami were informed
accordingly and granted a time period to comment on

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that
of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

12.10.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 313/3

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Luxembourg, 4 October 2004.

For the Council
The President

A. J. DE GEUS