natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In the joined Cases C-659/13 C & J Clark International Limited and C-34/14 Puma SE, the Court of Justice declared Council Regulations (EC) No 1472/2006 and Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1294/2009 invalid in so far as the European Commission did not examine the MET and individual treatment (‘IT’) claims submitted by exporting producers in the PRC and Vietnam that were not sampled, contrary to the requirements laid down in Articles 2(7)(b) and 9(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community [10] (‘the judgments’).
U spojenim predmetima C-659/13 C & J Clark International Limited i C-34/14 Puma SE Sud je Uredbu Vijeća (EZ) br. 1472/2006 i Provedbenu uredbu Vijeća (EU) br. 1294/2009 proglasio nevaljanima u dijelu u kojem Europska komisija nije ispitala zahtjeve za MET i individualni tretman („IT”) koje su podnijeli proizvođači izvoznici iz NRK-a i Vijetnama koji nisu uključeni u uzorak, što je protivno zahtjevima utvrđenima u članku 2. stavku 7. točki (b) i članku 9. stavku 5. Uredbe Vijeća (EZ) br. 384/96 od 22. prosinca 1995. o zaštiti od dampinškog uvoza iz zemalja koje nisu članice Europske zajednice [10] („presude”).
In case of annulment of an act adopted by the Institutions in the context of an administrative procedure, such as anti-dumping, compliance with the Court's judgement consists in the replacement of the annulled act by a new act, in which the illegality identified by the Court is eliminated (‘Asteris judgment’) [11].
U slučaju poništenja akta koji su donijele institucije u kontekstu administrativnog postupka, kao što je antidamping, usklađenost s presudom Suda sastoji se od zamjene poništenog akta novim aktom iz kojeg je izbačena nezakonitost koju je utvrdio Sud („presuda u predmetu Asteris”) [11].
Apart from the fact that the Institutions did not examine the MET and IT claims submitted by exporting producers in the PRC and Vietnam that were not sampled, all other findings made in Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006 and Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1294/2009 remain valid.
Osim činjenice da institucije nisu ispitale zahtjeve za MET i IT koje su podnijeli proizvođači izvoznici iz NRK-a i Vijetnama koji nisu uključeni u uzorak, svi ostali nalazi iz Uredbe Vijeća (EZ) br. 1472/2006 i Provedbene uredbe Vijeća (EU) br. 1294/2009 ostaju valjani.
In this case, the illegality occurred after initiation.
U ovom je predmetu do nezakonitosti došlo nakon pokretanja postupka.
Hence, the Commission decided to resume this anti-dumping proceeding that was still open at the very point at which the illegality occurred and to examine whether market economy conditions prevailed for the exporting producers concerned for the period from 1 April 2004 to 31 March 2005.
Stoga je Komisija odlučila nastaviti trenutačni antidampinški postupak koji je još bio otvoren u točki u kojoj je došlo do nezakonitosti i ispitati jesu li za dotične proizvođače izvoznike u razdoblju od 1. travnja 2004. do 31. ožujka 2005. prevladavali uvjeti tržišnoga gospodarstva.
For imports of C&J Clark International Ltd. and Puma SE, the Commission will assess all MET and IT claims submitted.
Komisija će za uvoz društava C&J Clark International Ltd. i Puma SE ocijeniti sve podnesene zahtjeve za MET i IT.
It is appropriate to order the national customs authorities, on the basis of Article 14 of the basic Regulation, not to reimburse those duties in the meantime.
Primjereno je na temelju članka 14. Osnovne uredbe nacionalnim carinskim tijelima naložiti da u međuvremenu ne vraćaju te pristojbe.
The Commission will make that assessment within eight months from the date of the judgment.
Komisija će provesti tu ocjenu u roku od osam mjeseci od datuma presude.
For imports of other importers that did not have standing themselves to bring an action for annulment, and which hence can rely on the judgment in their applications for re-imbursement of anti-dumping duties pursuant to Article 236 Community Customs Code, the Commission will, for the sake of efficient use of resources, only assess MET and IT claims of those exporting producers which are concerned by re-imbursement claims that have been filed with national customs authorities in due time and form.
Za uvoz drugih uvoznika koji sami nisu imali aktivnu legitimaciju za podnošenje tužbe za poništenje i koji se stoga mogu osloniti na presudu u svojim zahtjevima za povrat antidampinških pristojbi u skladu s člankom 236. Carinskog zakonika Zajednice Komisija će, radi učinkovite upotrebe resursa, procijeniti zahtjeve za MET i IT samo onih proizvođača izvoznika na koje se odnose zahtjevi za povrat koji su nacionalnim carinskim tijelima pravodobno dostavljeni u valjanom obliku.
The Commission notes that according to Article 236(2) of the Community Customs Code Import duties or export duties shall be repaid or remitted upon submission of an application to the appropriate customs office within a period of three years from the date on which the amount of those duties was communicated to the debtor.
Komisija napominje da se u skladu s člankom 236. stavkom 2. Carinskog zakonika Zajednice uvozne ili izvozne carine vraćaju ili otpuštaju nakon podnošenja zahtjeva carinarnici u roku od tri godine od dana kad je o iznosu tih carina obaviješten dužnik.
The Commission also notes that the invalidation of a regulation imposing anti-dumping duties does not constitute unforeseeable circumstances within the meaning of that provision, allowing an extension of the three-year time-limit during which an importer can request the repayment of import duties paid pursuant to that regulation.
Komisija napominje i da nevaljanost uredbe o uvođenju antidampinških pristojbi ne čini nepredviđene okolnosti u smislu te odredbe, čime se dopušta produljenje roka od tri godine tijekom kojeg uvoznik može zatražiti povrat carinskih pristojbi koje su plaćene u skladu s tom uredbom.
B. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE JUDGMENTS OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE IN JOINED CASES C-659/13 AND C-34/14
B. PROVEDBA PRESUDA SUDA U SPOJENIM PREDMETIMA C-659/13 I C-34/14
If an act of the Institutions has been declared invalid by a preliminary ruling of the Court of Justice, such judgment has erga omnes effects [14], namely. it is not limited to the applicant before the national court which then raises the question to the Court of Justice.
Ako je akt institucija proglašen nevaljanim prethodnom odlukom Suda, ta presuda ima učinke erga omnes [14], tj. nije ograničena na podnositelja zahtjeva pred nacionalnim sudom koji zatim upućuje pitanje Sudu.
In such a situation, the Commission is thus obliged to implement the judgement with regard to all the parties affected by the illegality which led to the annulment of the measure.
U toj je situaciji Komisija stoga obvezna provesti presudu u pogledu svih strana na koje utječe nezakonitost koja je dovela do poništenja mjere.
The Commission has the possibility to remedy the aspects of the contested Regulation which led to its annulment, while leaving unchanged the parts of the assessment which are not affected by the judgment [15].
Komisija može ispraviti aspekte Sporne uredbe koji su doveli do njezina poništenja, ostavljajući pritom nepromijenjene dijelove ocjene na koje se presuda [15] ne odnosi.
In order to ensure an efficient use of resources, the Commission refrains from investigating all the MET and IT claims made by non-sampled Chinese and Vietnamese exporting producers during the investigation which led to the adoption of the contested Regulation.
Kako bi osigurala učinkovitu upotrebu resursa, Komisija se suzdržava od ispitivanja svih zahtjeva za MET i IT kineskih i vijetnamskih proizvođača izvoznika koji nisu uključeni u uzorak tijekom ispitnog postupka koji je doveo do donošenja Sporne uredbe.
Instead, it considers it appropriate to oblige national customs authorities, which have to decide on an application for re-imbursement of anti-dumping duties on the basis of Article 236 of the Community Customs Code [16], to forward the request for re-imbursement to the Commission and to await the Commission's assessment of the MET and IT claim and, where appropriate, the re-imposition of the antidumping duty at the appropriate rate, before proceeding with re-imbursement.
Umjesto toga smatra primjerenim nacionalna carinska tijela, koja moraju donijeti odluke o zahtjevima za povrat antidampinških pristojbi na temelju članka 236. Carinskog zakonika Zajednice [16], prije izvršenja povrata obvezati da zahtjev za povrat proslijede Komisiji i da čekaju Komisijinu ocjenu zahtjeva za MET i IT te, prema potrebi, ponovno uvođenje antidampinške pristojbe po primjerenoj stopi.
The legal basis for such an obligation is Article 14 basic Regulation, which provides that the Regulation imposing duties shall specify the detailed modalities of its collection by Member States.
Pravna je osnova te obveze članak 14. Osnovne uredbe u kojem je navedeno da se u uredbi o uvođenju pristojbi odrede detaljni načini naplate koju provode države članice.
The Commission will then verify whether the exporting producer whose exports were subject to the repayment claim had indeed requested the MET or IT assessment and if yes, whether such an exporting producer should be granted MET or IT or not.
Komisija će zatim provjeriti je li proizvođač izvoznik čiji izvoz podliježe zahtjevu za povrat doista zatražio ocjenu MET-a ili IT-a i, ako jest, je li tom proizvođaču izvozniku potrebno odobriti MET ili IT.
The Commission will adopt Regulations establishing the assessment and re-imposing, where appropriate, the applicable duty rate.
Komisija će donijeti uredbe o ocjeni i, prema potrebi, ponovnom uvođenju primjenjive stope pristojbe.
Those newly established rates will take effect as from the date on which the annulled regulation entered into force.
Te novoutvrđene stope imat će učinak od datuma na koji je poništena uredba stupila na snagu.
Therefore, the national customs authorities are obliged to await the outcome of such investigation before deciding on any repayment claim.
Stoga su nacionalna carinska tijela obvezna pričekati ishod tog ispitnog postupka prije donošenja odluke o zahtjevu za povrat.
The Commission will strive to respect the delay provided for in the basic Regulation for assessing MET and IT, that is eight months from receiving the information from national customs authorities, in order to avoid any undue delays.
Komisija će nastojati poštovati rok predviđen u Osnovnoj uredbi za ocjenu MET-a i IT-a, tj. osam mjeseci od primitka podataka od nacionalnih carinskih tijela, kako bi se izbjegla nepotrebna kašnjenja.
C. CONCLUSIONS
C. ZAKLJUČCI
The analysis of MET and IT claims of exporting producers that have sold to Puma SE and C&J Clark International Ltd should be carried out within eight months from the date of the judgment.
Analizu zahtjeva za MET i IT proizvođača izvoznika koji su prodavali proizvode društvima Puma SE i C&J Clark International Ltd potrebno je provesti u roku od osam mjeseci od datuma presude.
As regards the anti-dumping duty imposed on other Chinese and Vietnamese exporting producers (apart from those subject to Council Implementing Decision 2014/149/EU and those referred to in the first sentence hereof) the national customs authorities before which claims for repayment or remission of anti-dumping duties paid in respect of exports of these other exporting producers were made should contact the Commission, so that it can assess the MET and IT claims and re-impose, where appropriate, the anti-dumping duties.
U pogledu antidampinške pristojbe uvedene na kineske i vijetnamske proizvođače izvoznike (osim onih na koje se primjenjuje Provedbena odluka Vijeća 2014/149/EU i onih koji su navedeni u prvoj rečenici ove Uredbe) nacionalna carinska tijela kojima su podneseni zahtjevi za povrat ili otpust antidampinških pristojbi plaćenih za izvoz tih ostalih proizvođača izvoznika trebala bi se obratiti Komisiji kako bi ona mogla procijeniti zahtjeve za MET i IT i, prema potrebi, ponovno uvesti antidampinške pristojbe.
D. COMMITTEE
D. ODBOR
The Regulation is in accordance with the opinion of the Committee established by Article 15(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009,
Uredba je u skladu s mišljenjem Odbora uspostavljenog člankom 15. stavkom 1. Uredbe (EZ) br. 1225/2009,
National customs authorities, which have received a request for re-imbursement, based on Article 236 of the Community Customs Code, of anti-dumping duties imposed by Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006 or Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1294/2009 and collected by national customs authorities, which is based on the fact that a non-sampled exporting producer had requested MET or IT, shall forward that request and any supporting documents to the Commission.
Nacionalna carinska tijela, koja su primila zahtjev za povrat, na temelju članka 236. Carinskog zakonika Zajednice, antidampinških pristojbi uvedenih Uredbom (EZ) br. 1472/2006 ili Provedbenom uredbom (EU) br. 1294/2009 i koje su naplatila nacionalna carinska tijela, a koji se zahtjev temelji na činjenici da je proizvođač izvoznik koji nije uključen u uzorak zatražio MET ili IT, prosljeđuju taj zahtjev i sve popratne dokumente Komisiji.
Within eight months of the receipt of the request and any supporting documents, the Commission shall verify whether the exporting producer had indeed lodged an MET and IT claim.,If so, the Commission shall assess that claim and re-impose the appropriate duty by means of a Commission Implementing Regulation, after disclosure pursuant to Article 20 of the basic Regulation.
Komisija u roku od osam mjeseci od primitka zahtjeva i svih popratnih dokumenata provjerava je li proizvođač izvoznik doista podnio zahtjev za MET i IT. Ako jest, Komisija ocjenjuje taj zahtjev te Provedbenom uredbom Komisije, nakon objave u skladu s člankom 20. Osnovne uredbe, ponovno uvodi odgovarajuću pristojbu.
The national customs authorities shall await the publication of the relevant Commission Implementing Regulation re-imposing the duties before deciding on the claim for repayment and remission of anti-dumping duties.
Nacionalna carinska tijela obvezna su pričekati objavu relevantne Provedbene uredbe Komisije o ponovnom uvođenju pristojbi prije nego što donesu odluku o zahtjevu za povrat i otpust antidampinških pristojbi.
Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51).
SL L 343, 22.12.2009., str. 51.
Council Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006 of 5 October 2006 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitely the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain footwear with upper leather originating in the People's Republic of China and Vietnam (OJ L 275, 6.10.2006, p. 1).
Uredba Vijeća (EZ) br. 1472/2006 od 5. listopada 2006. o uvođenju konačne antidampinške pristojbe i konačnoj naplati privremene pristojbe uvedene na uvoz određene obuće s gornjištima od kože podrijetlom iz Narodne Republike Kine i Vijetnama (SL L 275, 6.10.2006., str. 1.).
Council Regulation (EC) No 388/2008 of 29 April 2008 extending the definitive anti-dumping measures imposed by Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006 on imports of certain footwear with uppers of leather originating in the People's Republic of China to imports of the same product consigned from the Macao SAR, whether declared as originating in the Macao SAR or not (OJ L 117, 1.5.2008, p. 1).
Uredba Vijeća (EZ) br. 388/2008 od 29. travnja 2008. o proširenju konačnih antidampinških mjera uvedenih Uredbom (EZ) br. 1472/2006 o uvozu određene obuće s gornjištima od kože podrijetlom iz Narodne Republike Kine, na uvoz istovjetnog proizvoda koji se otprema iz Posebnog upravnog područja Makaa, bez obzira na to je li prijavljena kao proizvod podrijetlom iz Posebnog upravnog područja Makaa ili nije (SL L 117, 1.5.2008., str. 1.).
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1294/2009 of 22 December 2009 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain footwear with uppers of leather originating in Vietnam and originating in the People's Republic of China, as extended to imports of certain footwear with uppers of leather consigned from the Macao SAR, whether declared as originating in the Macao SAR or not, following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (OJ L 352, 30.12.2009, p. 1).
Provedbena uredba Vijeća (EU) br. 1294/2009 od 22. prosinca 2009. o uvođenju konačne antidampinške pristojbe na uvoz određene obuće s gornjištima od kože podrijetlom iz Vijetnama i podrijetlom iz Narodne Republike Kine, kako je proširena na uvoz određene obuće s gornjištima od kože koja se otprema iz Posebnog upravnog područja Makaa, bez obzira na to je li prijavljena kao proizvod podrijetlom iz Posebnog upravnog područja Makaa ili nije, nakon revizije nakon isteka mjera prema članku 11. stavku 2. Uredbe Vijeća (EZ) br. 384/96 (SL L 352, 30.12.2009., str. 1.).
Council Implementing Decision 2014/149/EU of 18 March 2014 rejecting the proposal for an Implementing Regulation reimposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on certain footwear with uppers of leather originating in the People's Republic of China and produced by Brosmann Footwear (HK) Ltd, Seasonable Footwear (Zhongshan) Ltd, Lung Pao Footwear (Guangzhou) Ltd, Risen Footwear (HK) Co Ltd and Zhejiang Aokang Shoes Co. Ltd (OJ L 82, 20.3.2014, p. 27).
Provedbena odluka Vijeća 2014/149/EU od 18. ožujka 2014. o odbijanju prijedloga Provedbene uredbe o ponovnom uvođenju konačne antidampinške pristojbe i konačnoj naplati privremene pristojbe na uvoz određene obuće s gornjištima od kože podrijetlom iz Narodne Republike Kine te koju su proizveli Brosmann Footwear (HK) Ltd, Seasonable Footwear (Zhongshan) Ltd, Lung Pao Footwear (Guangzhou) Ltd, Risen Footwear (HK) Co Ltd i Zhejiang Aokang Shoes Co. Ltd (SL L 82, 20.3.2014., str. 27.).
Joined cases 97, 193, 99 and 215/86 Asteris AE and others and Hellenic Republic v Commission [1988] ECR 2181, paragraphs 27 and 28.
Spojeni predmeti 97, 193, 99 i 215/86, Asteris AE i ostali i Helenska Republika protiv Komisije [1988.] ECR 2181, stavci 27. i 28.
Case T-301/01 Alitalia v Commission [2008] II-1753, paragraphs 99 and 142;
predmet T-301/01, Alitalia protiv Komisije [2008.] II-1753, točke 99. i 142.;
Joined Cases T-267/08 and T-279/08 Région Nord-Pas de Calais v Commission [2011] II-0000, paragraph 83.
spojeni predmeti T-267/08 i T-279/08, Région Nord-Pas de Calais protiv Komisije [2011.] II-0000, točka 83.
Case C-415/96 Spain v Commission [1998] ECR I-6993, paragraph 31;
Predmet C-415/96, Španjolska protiv Komisije [1998.] ECR I-6993, točka 31.;
Case C-458/98 P Industrie des Poudres Sphériques v Council [2000] I-8147, paragraphs 80 to 85.
predmet C-458/98 P, Industrie des Poudres Sphériques protiv Vijeća [2000.] I-8147, točke 80. do 85.
Case 66/80 International Chemical Corporation [1981] 1191, paragraph 18.
Predmet 66/80, International Chemical Corporation [1981.] 1191, točka 18.
Case C-458/98 P Industrie des Poudres Sphériques v Council [2000] I-8147, paragraphs 80 to 85;
predmet C-458/98 P, Industrie des Poudres Sphériques protiv Vijeća [2000.] I-8147, točke 80. do 85.;
According to the case-law of the Court, the procedure for replacing the annulled act may be resumed at the very point at which the illegality occurred [12].
Prema sudskoj praksi Suda, postupak za zamjenu poništenog akta može se nastaviti u točki u kojoj je došlo do protupravnosti [12].
In a situation where a Regulation imposing definitive anti-dumping measures is annulled, that means that subsequent to the annulment, the anti-dumping proceeding is still open, because the act concluding the anti-dumping proceeding has disappeared from the Union legal order [13], except if the illegality occurred at the stage of initiation.
U situaciji kad uredba kojom se uvode konačne antidampinške mjere bude poništena, to znači da je nakon poništenja taj antidampinški postupak i dalje otvoren jer akt kojim se zaključuje taj antidampinški postupak više nije dio pravnog poretka Unije [13], osim ako je do protupravnosti došlo u fazi pokretanja postupka.
Case C-458/98 P Industrie des Poudres Sphériques v Council [2000] I-8147, paragraph 80 to 85.
Predmet C-458/98 P, Industrie des Poudres Sphériques protiv Vijeća [2000.] I-8147, točke 80. do 85.
Or, as of 1 May 2016, on the basis of the relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union customs code (OJ L 269, 10.10.2013, p. 1).
Ili, od 1. svibnja 2016., na temelju relevantnih odredaba Uredbe (EU) br. 952/2013 Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća od 9. listopada 2013. o Carinskom zakoniku Unije (SL L 269, 10.10.2013., str. 1.).
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/224
Provedbena uredba Komisije (EU) 2016/224
Those private storage schemes have been extended by Commission Implementing Regulations (EU) No 1337/2014 [6], (EU) 2015/303 [7] and (EU) 2015/1548 [8].
Ti programi privatnog skladištenja prošireni su provedbenim uredbama Komisije (EU) br. 1337/2014 [6], (EU) 2015/303 [7] i (EU) 2015/1548 [8].
As a result, applications for aid can be lodged until 29 February 2016.
Stoga se zahtjevi za potporu mogu predavati do 29. veljače 2016.
In addition, the global demand for milk and milk products has remained fragile throughout 2015 while milk supply has increased in the main exporting regions.
Osim toga, globalna potražnja za mlijekom i mliječnim proizvodima i dalje je bila nestabilna tijekom 2015., dok se isporuka mlijeka u glavnim regijama izvoznicama povećala.
In view of the current market situation it is appropriate to secure the undisrupted availability of the private storage aid schemes for butter and skimmed milk powder and to extend them until the end of the 2016 intervention period on 30 September 2016.
S obzirom na trenutačnu tržišnu situaciju primjereno je osigurati neprekinutu dostupnost programa potpore za privatno skladištenje maslaca i obranog mlijeka u prahu te ih produžiti do završetka razdoblja intervencije u 2016. na dan 30. rujna 2016.
In Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 947/2014, ‘29 February 2016’ is replaced by ‘30 September 2016’.
U članku 5. Uredbe (EU) br. 947/2014 datum „29. veljače 2016.” zamjenjuje se datumom „30. rujna 2016.”.
In Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 948/2014, ‘29 February 2016’ is replaced by ‘30 September 2016’.
U članku 5. Uredbe (EU) br. 948/2014 datum „29. veljače 2016.” zamjenjuje se datumom „30. rujna 2016.”.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/225
Provedbena uredba Komisije (EU) 2016/225
fixing the maximum volume of product per Member State and the period for lodging applications for exceptional private storage aid for the remaining unused quantities of certain cheeses from those set out in Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/1852
o utvrđivanju najveće količine proizvoda po državi članici i roka za podnošenje zahtjeva za izvanredni program potpore za privatno skladištenje preostalih neiskorištenih količina određenih sireva od onih određenih u Delegiranoj uredbi (EU) 2015/1852
Having regard to the Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 [1],
uzimajući u obzir Uredbu (EU) br. 1308/2013 Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća od 17. prosinca 2013. o uspostavljanju zajedničke organizacije tržišta poljoprivrednih proizvoda i stavljanju izvan snage uredbi Vijeća (EEZ) br. 922/72, (EEZ) br. 234/79, (EZ) br. 1037/2001 i (EZ) br. 1234/2007 [1],
Having regard to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/1852 of 15 October 2015 opening a temporary exceptional private storage aid scheme for certain cheeses and fixing in advance the amount of aid [2], in particular Article 15 thereof,
uzimajući u obzir Delegiranu uredbu Komisije (EU) 2015/1852 оd 15. listopada 2015. o otvaranju privremenog izvanrednog programa potpore za privatno skladištenje određenih sireva i utvrđivanju iznosa potpore unaprijed [2], a posebno njezin članak 15.,