natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Når den dumpingmargen, der oprindelig er blevet konstateret, hverken er ophørt eller blot begrænset efter pålæggelse af told — dvs. når hverken den forretningsmæssigt forbundne importør eller dennes koncern har ændret adfærd, som følge af at den pålagte antidumpingtold er blevet absorberet inden for koncernen - er dumpingmargenen derfor ikke alene fortsat den samme, men er yderligere blevet forstærket, for så vidt som den pålagte told er blevet absorberet.
However, since it has not been established that the rule is manifestly inappropriate, the new provisions relied on by the applicants cannot be regarded as different options which might have been adopted by the Community legislature, and the Court cannot therefore find that the Council was under an obligation, in 1988, to adopt similar provisions, more favourable to the applicants than the contested rule. The argument based on the existence of new Community and international provisions cannot therefore be upheld.
Fordi en forretningsmæssigt forbundet importør, der er blevet pålagt antidumpingtold, tager et første skridt til at afskaffe den oprindelige dumpingmargen (»single jump«), er det ikke åbenbart, at fællesskabslovgiver som følge heraf skal foreskrive, at tolden skal tilbagebetales fuldt ud.
In those circumstances, where an associated importer, after antidumping duties are levied, takes a first step by eliminating only the initial dumping margin («single jump»), there is no obvious reason why the Community legislature should as a result provide for full reimbursement of those duties.
Den omstændighed, at en forretningsmæssigt forbunden importør gennem et »single jump« undgår at forstærke den oprindelige dumping, betyder imidlertid ikke, at denne definitivt har ændret sin adfærd på markedet.
The fact that the associated importer avoids, by means of a «single jump», an increase in the initial dumping does not mean that that importer has actually changed his market behaviour definitively.
Det er derfor ikke obligatorisk at yde tilbagebetaling til dette tilfælde.
For this reason, it is not imperative that he be rewarded by the grant of a reimbursement.
I den foreliggende sag er der fremført to argumenter til støtte for anbringendet om, at proportionalitetsprincippet er blevet tilsidesat. Sagsøgerne har for det første gjort gældende, at den omtvistede regel som sådan er uforholdsmæssig.
It must be borne in mind that the Community reimbursement system criticized by the applicants is, essentially, the same as the previous system considered in the judgment in Case C-188/88 NMB and Others ν Commission.
For så vidt angår den omtvistede regel om, at tolden skal betragtes som en omkostning, bemærkes, at fællesskabslovgiver udtrykkeligt har fastslået, at reglen er anvendelig med hensyn til tilbagebetaling af erlagt antidumpingtold. Den
Moreover, it is not disputed that a «double jump» eliminates dumping: if an associated importer passes on the double amount of anti­dumping duties paid as part of the resale price or if the normal value falls by an amount corresponding to the «double jump» (in the country of export or of origin), then the dumping has, in any event, ceased.
Det bestrides endvidere ikke, at et »double jump« bringer dumpingen til ophør: Såfremt en forretningsmæssigt forbundet importør overvælter et beløb, der svarer til det dobbelte af antidumpingtolden, på salgsprisen, eller såfremt den normale værdi (i eksport- eller oprindelseslandet) falder med et beløb svarende til et »double jump«, er dumpingen under alle
As the Court of Justice held in that judgment, the only difference, concerning construction of the export price, between the relevant Community regulation and the 1979 GATT Anti-Dumping Code — also at issue in the case — is that, whereas the Code merely lays down the principle that due allowance should be made for costs incurred between importation and resale, «including duties and taxes», the Community regulation specifies certain duties and other
omstændigheder ophørt. Under disse omstændigheder er det ikke åbenbart uhensigtsmæssigt, at fællesskabslovgiver har begrænset tilbagebetaling af antidumpingtold til tilfælde af »double jump«, hvor det faktisk ville være uforholdsmæssigt at nægte godtgørelse.
Findings of the Court of First Instance costs, including in particular antidumping duties, for which allowance must be made when the adjustment is carried out The Court inferred from this that there is no inconsistency between the Community rules and the Anti-Dumping Code.
eksportprisen — der ligeledes er omtvistet under nærværende sag — at mens kodeksen alene fastslår princippet om, at der skal tages hensyn til omkostninger, som er påløbet mellem indførsel og videresalg, »herunder skatter og afgifter«, specificerer EF-forordningen visse af de toldafgifter og andre omkostninger, herunder bla. antidumpingtold, som der skal tages hensyn til ved justeringen.
As the Court of Justice held in Case C-188/88 NMB and Others ν Commission (paragraphs 34 and 35), the alleged difference in the treatment of independent importers and associated importers with respect to the refund of anti­dumping duties is justified by the difference in their respective situations in relation to dumping and does not therefore constitute discrimination.
Domstolen udledte heraf, at der ikke er nogen modstrid mellem EF-forordningens og antidumpingkodeksens bestemmelser.
Whereas independent importers are not involved in dumping, importers who are associated with the exporter are thereby placed on the other side of the «dumping fence», in the sense that they participate in the practices which constitute dumping and, in any event, are in a position to have full knowledge of the circumstances underlying it.
Af det således anførte fremgår, at reglen om, at tolden skal betragtes som en omkostning, på baggrund af nærværende undersøgelse, der er begrænset til retsspørgsmål, fremtræder som en fornuftigt begrundet metode.
The wording of the 1979 Anti-Dumping Code is indeed clear in that in Article 8(3), it provides that the amount of antidumping duty must not exceed the dumping margin and that any duty in excess of that margin must be refunded as quickly as possible.
Retten har derfor ikke grundlag for at fastslå, at fællesskabslovgiver med denne regel har overskredet grænserne for sit skøn.
However, there is no comparable stipulation concerning construction of the export price, which is needed in order to determine the actual dumping margin.
Den omtvistede regel kan derfor under ingen omstændigheder anses for en »åbenbart uhensigtsmæssig« foranstaltning til at yde industrien i Fællesskabet en rimelig beskyttelse mod dumpingforanstaltninger.
In particular, Articles 2(5) and (6) and 8(3) do not deal explicitly or implicitly with the question of the legality of the «duty as a cost» rule.
Det må medgives, at ordlyden af 1979antidumpingkodeksen er klar, idet den bestemmer, at størrelsen af antidumpingtolden ikke må overstige dumpingmargenen, og at overskydende told skal tilbagebetales snarest muligt.
Moreover, it cannot be denied that the anti­dumping duties which an independent importer pays upon importation constitute an additional cost which it must cope with in one way or another.
Specielt tager dens artikel 2, stk 5 og 6, og artikel 8, stk. 3, hverken udtrykkeligt eller stiltiende stilling til spørgsmålet om, hvorvidt reglen om, at told skal betragtes som en omkostning, er retmæssig.
In these circumstances, the fact that, as a result of the contested rule, those duties are treated as a cost for the associated importer merely places these two categories of trader on the same footing.
Det bemærkes derfor, at de kontraherende parter inden for GATT ikke har reguleret denne særlige problemstilling, som de var bekendt med, i antidumpingkodeksen.
Consequently, it must be held that the contracting parties to GATT did not deal with this specific problem, with which they were familiar, in the Anti-Dumping Code.
Kodeksen er derfor Ugeledes på dette punkt kendetegnet af stor smidighed.
On this point too, therefore, the Code evinces great flexibility.
Når henses til at der ikke er ført bevist for, at reglen er åbenbart uhensigtsmæssig, kan de nye bestemmelser, som sagsøgerne har påberåbt sig, blot anses for udtryk for fællesskabslovgivers forskellige valgmuligheder, uden at Retten herved har adgang til at fastslå, at Rådet i 1988 havde været forpligtet til at udstede tilsvarende bestemmelser, der var mere fordelagtige for sagsøgerne end den omtvistede regel. Argumentationen vedrørende de nye fællesskabsretlige og internationale bestemmelser kan derfor ikke tiltrædes.
It cannot therefore be interpreted as imposing a particular obligation on the Community (judgment of the Court of Justice in Case C-280/93 Germany ν Council, cited above, paragraph 111) not to introduce, in implementation of the Code, a «duty as a cost» rule (see also the judgment of the Court of Justice in Case 187/85 FEDIOL ν Commission [1988] ECR 4155, paragraph 12).
Klagepunktet om tilsidesættelse af forbuddet mod forskehbehandling af
The applicants' view that the contested rule contravenes the Anti-Dumping Code must therefore be rejected as unfounded.
Klagepunktet om tilsidesættelse antidumpingkodeksen af 1979
The alleged infringement of the principle of non­discrimination
Det bemærkes dernæst, at den tilbagebetalingsordning, der anvendes af Fællesskabet, og som sagsøgerne har anfægtet, i det væsentlige er identisk med den tidligere ordning, som var genstand for NMB-sagen.
It is therefore at the GATT level that the situation of importers associated with their exporters is made subject to special rules shaped by doubts as to the reliability of the export price actually charged.
Som Domstolen fastslog i denne dom er den eneste forskel mellem den relevante EF-forordning og GATTs antidumpingkodeks fra 1979, for så vidt angår beregningen af
In these circumstances, the Community legislature cannot be criticized for breach of the principle of non-discrimination by providing for application of the «duty as a cost» rule only with respea to associated importers.
Det er ufornødent at træffe afgørelse om den af NMB-Minebea-GmbH, og NMB Italia Sri anlagte sag, i det omfang den angår antidumpingtold opkrævet i tiden efter 21. september 1990.
It is unnecessary to give judgment on the action brought by NMB-Minebea-GmbH, NMB (UK) Ltd and NMB Italia Sri to the extent to which it relates to the reimbursement of antidumping duties collected in relation to the period from 21 September 1990;
I øvrigt frifindes
The remainder of the action is dismissed;
Sagsøgerne betaler sagens omkostninger in solidum, bortset fra de omkostninger, som er afholdt af intervenienten, der bærer sine egne omkostninger.·
The applicants are ordered jointly and severalty to bear the costs, with the exception of those of the intervener, which shall bear its own costs.»
»Tjenestemænd — husstandstillæg — højere erhvervsmæssig indkomstfor ægtefællen end det efter vedtægten gældende højeste beløb — tilbagekaldelse med tilbagevirkende gyldighed af en afgørelse om tilkendelse af husstandstillæg — tilbagesøgning af beløb ydet med urette· (Tredje Afdeling)
On 22 May 1990, 8 June 1990 and 26 June 1991, the applicant imported aluminium alloy bars from the former Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Under the relevant sales contracts, the customs duties were to be paid by the Yugoslav sellers.
Sag T-75/95 Giinzler Aluminium GmbH / Kommissionen for De Europæiske Fællesskaber Frie varebevægelser
In its appeal, the applicant also sought and obtained an extension of time to pay under national law.
5. juni 1996 beslutning fra Kommissionen om manglende fritagelse for
After those imports had been declared by the applicant, the competent German customs office issued assessment notices on 25 May 1990, 11 June 1990 and 26 June 1991, exempting the imports from customs duty.
»Annullationssøgsmål importafgifter· (Tredje Afdeling)
22) and Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1347/91 of 23 May 1991 re-establishing the levying of customs duties from 27 May to 31 December 1991 (OJ 1991 L 129, p. 21)).
Faktiske omstændigheder og sagens baggrund
That request was received by the Commission on 16 May 1994.
Efter sagsøgerens toldangivelser traf det tyske toldsted henholdsvis den 25. maj 1990, den 11. juni 1990 og den 26. juni 1991 nogle toldafgørelser, hvorefter de pågældende indførsler var fritaget for told.
The contested decision was notified to the applicant by letter of 27 December 1994, received on 29 December 1994.
Den 22. maj 1990, den 8. juni 1990 og den 26. juni 1991 importerede sagsøgeren nogle partier stænger af aluminiumslegering fra den tidligere Føderative Republik Jugoslavien.
The admissibility of the second head of claim, that the Commission be obliged to take a new decision concerning Germany's request of 2 May 1994
I henhold til de til grund herfor liggende købekontrakter skulle eventuel told i anledning heraf bæres af de jugoslaviske sælgere.
As a result, it was not until March and August 1991 (as regards the 1990 and 1991 imports respectively), following a subsequent verification of the customs declarations, that the exemptions from customs duties were discovered to have been wrongly granted.
Meddelelserne om toldfritagelse beroede imidlertid på en fejl fra de tyske toldmyndigheders side.
On 23 April and 30 June 1992, the competent principal customs office sent the applicant customs duty reassessment notices for an amount totalling DM 29 429.79.
Præferenceordningen for Jugoslavien var for så vidt angår de pågældende perioder ophørt med at være i kraft, således som
It is settled law that in an action for annulment brought under Article 173 of the EC Treaty, the Community Court cannot, without encroaching on the prerogatives of the administrative authority, order a Community institution to take the necessary measures to comply, as required by Article 176 of the Treaty, with a judgment by which a decision is annulled.
Ved skrivelse af 27. december 1994, som sagsøgeren modtog den 29. december 1994, blev den omtvistede beslutning meddelt sagsøgeren.
It is, first of all, common ground that the imports in question were subject to customs duties under Commission Regulations No 1280/90 and No 1347/91.
Endvidere undlod toldstedet at give meddelelse til den centrale toldmyndighed, der fører tilsyn med kontingenter og lofter. Som følge heraf blev det, efter en efterfølgende kontrol af toldanmeldelserne, først konstateret i henholdsvis marts 1991 og august 1991, at toldfritagelserne var blevet meddelt med urette.
have been collected as a result of an error made by the competent authorities, the person liable must have acted in good faith — that is to say that he could not reasonably have detected the error made by the competent authorities — and he must have observed all the provisions laid down by the rules in force as far as his customs declaration is concerned (see, most recently, Case C­292/91 Weis ν Hauptzollamt Würzburg [1993] ECR 1­2219, paragraph 14).
Formaliteten for så vidt angår påstanden om, at Kommissionen tilpligtes at træffe en ny beslutning vedrørende Tysklands anmodning af 2. maj 1994
When those conditions are fulfilled, the person liable is entitled to the waiver of post­clearance recovery (see Weis, paragraph 15).
Henholdsvis den 23. april og den 30. juni 1992 fremsendte vedkommende toldkammer sagsøgeren nogle afgørelser om ændring af toldafgørelserne, hvorefter der skulle betales 29 429,79 DM i told.
Conversely, if only one of the three conditions is not met, the request for waiver of post­clearance recovery is not justified.
Det bemærkes herom, at Fællesskabets retsinstanser efter fast retspraksis ikke under et annullationssøgsmål i henhold til EF-traktatens artikel 173 uden at gribe ind i den administrative myndigheds beføjelser kan tilpligte en fællesskabsinstitution at træffe de foranstaltninger, som opfyldelsen efter traktatens artikel 176 af en dom om annullation af en afgørelse indebærer.
Furthermore, it was as a result of an error on the part of the competent German customs office that customs duties were not levied on the three consignments; the German authorities subsequently took action to recover the customs duties which the applicant had not been required to pay on importation. It appears from the file that the applicant has not yet paid those duties.
Efter at sagsøgeren var blevet bekendt med, at man ville foretage efteropkrævning af told, forsøgte selskabet at komme i kontakt med sine jugoslaviske aftaleparter.
In the present case, the Court considers it appropriate to focus on the second condition, as to whether or not the error could have been detected by the trader concerned.
Det bemærkes indledningsvis, at der i henhold til forordning nr. 1280/90 og 1347/91 skulle opkræves told ved de pågældende indførsler, hvilket er ubestridt.
With regard to the nature of the error made by the German authorities in exempting the imports in question from customs duties, contrary to the rules in force, the Court considers that those rules were simple enough to be easily understood.
Det lægges endvidere til grund, at det beroede på en fejl fra det tyske toldsteds side, at der ikke blev opkrævet told ved de tre indførsler, og at de tyske myndigheder senere tog skridt til at opkræve den told, som sagsøgeren ikke var blevet afkrævet ved indførslerne. Det fremgår yderligere af sagen, at sagsøgeren endnu ikke har erlagt tolden.
With regard to the trader's professional experience, the Court rejects the applicant's argument that since it had only occasionally imported aluminium bars from abroad it must be regarded as an inexperienced trader and could not reasonably be expected to be more knowledgeable than the customs authorities, still less to review their actions.
Sagsøgeren indgav herefter en klage til de tyske toldmyndigheder med krav om, at der på grundlag af artikel 5, stk. 2, i Rådets forordning nr. 1697/79 af 24. juli 1979 - om efteropkrævning af import- eller eksportafgifter, som ikke er opkrævet hos debitor for varer, der er angivet til en toldprocedure, som medfører en forpligtelse til at betale sådanne afgifter — blev truffet bestemmelse om at undlade at foretage en efteropkrævning af told.
The application for waiver of such post­clearance recovery must therefore be assessed in accordance with Regulation No 1697/79, and in particular with Article 5(2) thereof, which provides that «the competent authorities may refrain from taking action for the post­clearance recovery of import duties or export duties which were not collected as a result of an error made by the competent authorities themselves which could not reasonably have been detected by the person liable, the latter having for his part acted in good faith and observed all the provisions laid down by the rules in force as far as his customs declaration is concerned».
Subsidiært ansøgte sagsøgeren om en fritagelse for importafgifter på grundlag af artikel 13 i Rådets forordning nr. 1430/79 om godtgørelse af eller fritagelse for import- eller eksportafgifter.
The object of Regulation No 1697/79, as stated in Article 1 thereof, is to determine the conditions under which post­clearance recovery is undertaken of import or export duties on goods entered for a customs procedure involving the obligation to pay such duties which have not been required of the person liable for payment.
Ved klagen ansøgte sagsøgeren på grundlag af nationale bestemmelser endvidere om, og blev indrømmet, en udsættelse af betalingsfristen.
In addition, Regulation No 1697/79, repealed with effect from 1 January 1994 by Article 251 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code was in force at the material times, the goods having been imported in 1990 and 1991 and the reassessment notices having been issued in 1992.
Den 2. maj 1994 anmodede de tyske myndigheder Kommissionen om at afgøre, hvorvidt der efter artikel 13 i forordning nr. 1430/79 var grundlag for at indrømme en fritagelse for importafgifter.
The argument that an importer cannot be expected to have more extensive knowledge than customs officials has been rejected by the Court of Justice, on the ground that to establish any such principle would make it practically impossible to effect post­clearance recovery since the error will perforce always have been committed by the official concerned through failure to examine a factual or legal situation in every respect.
Under disse omstændigheder må kravet om fritagelse for efteropkrævning vurderes på grundlag af forordning nr. 1697/79, jf. navnlig artikel 5, stk. 2, hvorefter »de kompetente myndigheder kan undlade at foretage
Article 5(2) of Regulation No 1697/79 lays down three conditions which must be met concurrently to enable the competent customs authorities to refrain from taking action for the post­clearance recovery of import duties: the duties must not
efteropkrævning af import- eller eksportafgift, der ikke er opkrævet som følge af en fejl, som de kompetente myndigheder selv har begået, og som debitor ikke med rimelighed kunne forventes at have opdaget, såfremt sidstnævnte i forbindelse med toldangivelsen har handlet i god tro og overholdt samtlige bestemmelser i de gældende forskrifter«.
relevant provisions and publications if it wished to be certain of not being liable for duty after clearance. It is settled law that, as from the date of their publication in the Official Journal, the applicable Community provisions constitute the only relevant substantive rules, of which all are deemed to be aware.
Formålet med forordning nr. 1697/79 er således, jf. artikel 1, at fastlægge de betingelser, hvorunder myndighederne kan efteropkræve de import- eller eksportafgifter, der ikke er opkrævet hos debitor for varer, der er angivet til en toldprocedure, som medfører en forpligtelse til at betale sådanne afgifter.
The error could have been detected by an attentive trader by reading the Official Journal in which the regulations had been published several days before the import transactions in question took place. Contrary to the applicant's opinion, that caselaw does not apply only to commercial traders whose activities essentially consist of import-export operations.
Hvad angår spørgsmålet om sagsøgerens erfaring finder Retten at burde forkaste det af selskabet anførte, hvorefter det må anses for en erhvervsdrivende uden erfaring, idet det kun lejlighedsvis har importeret stænger af aluminium fra udlandet, således at det ikke med rimelighed kan forlanges af sagsøgeren, at selskabet er bedre underrettet end toldmyndighederne, og endnu mindre, at det skal være i stand til at vurdere, om disse myndigheders afgørelser er rigtige.
Even though the Commission should have assessed the applicant's request under Article 5(2) of Regulation No 1697/79, Article 13 of Regulation No 1430/79 and Article 5(2) of Regulation No 1697/79 pursue the same aim, namely to limit the post-clearance payment of import and export duties to cases where such payment is justified and is compatible with a fundamental principle, namely the protection of legitimate expectations. Although the
Det bemærkes dernæst, at forordning nr. 1697/79, der ved artikel 251 i Rådets forordning (EØF) nr. 2913/92 af 12. oktober 1992 om indførelse af en EF-toldkodeks blev ophævet med virkning fra den 1. januar 1994, var i kraft på tidspunktet for de faktiske omstændigheder, idet indførslerne fandt sted i henholdsvis 1990 og 1991, og ændringsafgørelserne blev truffet i 1992.
It follows from all the foregoing that the German authorities' errors as to exemption from customs duties could reasonably have been detected, within the meaning of Article 5(2) of Regulation No 1697/79, by the applicant Since the person liable is not entitled to waiver of post-clearance recovery of customs duties unless all the conditions set out in that provision are met, it would have been correct to refuse an application for waiver if the German authorities had asked the Commission to decide on the possible application of Article 5(2) of Regulation No 1697/79 rather than Article 13 of Regulation No 1430/79.