natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Article 1 shall apply to the products listed in sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 13 and 14 in Annex I to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3846/87 [13] insofar as the exporter concerned can supply proof to the satisfaction of the competent authorities that the products were destined for Lebanon.The competent authorities shall base their assessment on the export licence, the export declaration or the commercial documents referred to in Article 1(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 4045/89.
Člen 1 se uporablja za proizvode, naštete v oddelkih 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 13 in 14 Priloge I k Uredbi Komisije (EGS) št. 3846/87 [13], če lahko zadevni izvoznik pristojnim organom predloži dokazilo, da so bili proizvodi namenjeni v Libanon.Pristojni organi se odločijo na podlagi izvoznega dovoljenja, izvozne deklaracije ali trgovinskih dokumentov iz člena 1(2) Uredbe (EGS) št. 4045/89.
By 31 January 2007, Member States shall notify the Commission of the quantities of the products concerned by each of the measures laid down in Article 1, detailing the number and date of issue of the licence, the export refunds nomenclature code, the quantity of the products, the initial term of validity and the extended term of validity.
Države članice do 31. januarja 2007 obvestijo Komisijo o količinah zadevnih proizvodov za vsakega od ukrepov iz člena 1, pri čemer podrobno navedejo številko in datum izdaje dovoljenja, količino proizvodov glede na tarifno oznako nomenklature za izvozna nadomestila, prvotni rok veljavnosti in podaljšani rok veljavnosti.
Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 508/2006 (OJ L 92, 30.3.2006, p.10).
Uredba, kakor je bila nazadnje spremenjena z Uredbo (ES) št. 508/2006 (UL L 92, 30.3.2006, str. 10).
Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 988/2006 OJ L 176, 30.6.2006, p. 98.
Uredba, kakor je bila nazadnje spremenjena z Uredbo (ES) št. 988/2006 (UL L 176, 30.6.2006, str. 98).
Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1498/2004 (OJ L 275, 25.5.2004, p. 8).
Uredba, kakor je bila spremenjena z Uredbo (ES) št. 1498/2004 (UL L 275, 25.5.2004, str. 8).
Council Regulation (EC) No 1264/2006
Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 1264/2006
terminating the investigations concerning the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of silicon carbide originating in the Russian Federation and Ukraine and imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of silicon carbide originating in the People's Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96
o zaključku preiskav v zvezi s protidampinškimi ukrepi, veljavnimi za uvoz silicijevega karbida s poreklom iz Ruske federacije in Ukrajine, in uvedbi dokončne protidampinške dajatve na uvoz silicijevega karbida s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske po pregledu zaradi izteka ukrepa v skladu s členom 11(2) Uredbe (ES) št. 384/96
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) and in particular Articles 11(2) and 11(3) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 384/96 z dne 22. decembra 1995 o zaščiti proti dampinškemu uvozu iz držav, ki niso članice Evropske skupnosti [1] („osnovna uredba“) in zlasti členov 11(2) in 11(3) Uredbe,
Previous investigations, measures in force and on-going investigations
Prejšnje preiskave, veljavni ukrepi in sedanje preiskave
By Regulation (EC) No 821/94 [2], following an expiry review in accordance with Article 14 and 15 of Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88 [3], the Council prolonged the imposed definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of silicon carbide (SiC) originating in the People's Republic of China (PRC), Poland, the Russian Federation (Russia) and Ukraine.
Po pregledu zaradi izteka ukrepov v skladu s členoma 14 in 15 Uredbe (EGS) št. 2423/88 [2] je Svet z Uredbo (ES) št. 821/94 [3] podaljšal uvedene dokončne protidampinške dajatve na uvoz silicijevega karbida („SK“) s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske („LRK“), Poljske, Ruske federacije („Rusija“) in Ukrajine.
At the same time, the Commission, by Decision 94/202/EC [4], accepted an undertaking offered by the Government of Russia, in conjunction with V/O Stankoimport, Moscow, Russia.
Hkrati je Komisija s Sklepom 94/202/ES [4] sprejela zavezo, ki jo je ponudila ruska vlada skupaj z družbo V/O Stankoimport, Moskva, Rusija.
In May 2000, by Regulation (EC) No 1100/2000 [5], the Council again prolonged the definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of SiC originating in the PRC, Russia and Ukraine following an expiry review and also prolonged the undertaking offered by the Russian government in conjunction with V/O Stankoimport, Moscow, Russia accepted by Commission Decision 94/202/EC.
Svet je po pregledu zaradi izteka ukrepa z Uredbo (ES) št. 1100/2000 [5] zopet podaljšal dokončno protidampinško dajatev na uvoz SK s poreklom iz LRK, Rusije in Ukrajine ter podaljšal zavezo, ki jo je ponudila ruska vlada skupaj z družbo V/O Stankoimport, Moskva, Rusija, sprejeto s Sklepom Komisije 94/202/ES.
The investigation mentioned in recital 1 leading to the imposition of definitive anti-dumping duties and the acceptance of undertakings from certain exporters concerned by this investigation, and the expiry reviews concluded in 1994 and 2000 mentioned in recitals 1 and 2 will hereinafter be referred as to ‘the original investigations’.
Preiskava, navedena v uvodi izjavi (1) zgoraj, zaradi katere so bile uvedene končne protidampinške dajatve in sprejete zaveze določenih izvoznikov, ki jih zadeva ta preiskava, ter pregleda zaradi izteka ukrepa, zaključena leta 1994 in leta 2000, navedena v uvodnih izjavah (1) in (2) zgoraj, se v nadaljnjem besedilu imenujeta „prvotni preiskavi“.
In 2004, by Regulation (EC) No 991/2004, the Council provided for the exemption from the anti-dumping duties of imports into the new Member States that acceded to the European Union on 1 May 2004 (the EU-10) made under the terms of special undertaking offers (enlargement undertakings), and authorised the Commission to accept those enlargement undertakings.
Leta 2004 je Svet z Uredbo (ES) št. 991/2004 predvidel oprostitev protidampinških dajatev za uvoz v nove države članice, ki so pristopile k Evropski uniji 1. maja 2004 („EU-10“), v skladu s pogoji posebnih ponujenih zavez („širitvene zaveze“) in Komisijo pooblastil, da sprejme te širitvene zaveze.
On this basis, by Decisions 2004/498/EC [6] and 2004/782/EC [7], the Commission accepted the undertakings offered by the Ukrainian exporting producer Open Joint Stock Company ‘Zaporozhsky Abrasivny Combinat’.
Skladno s tem je Komisija s sklepoma 2004/498/ES [6] in 2004/782/ES [7] sprejela zaveze, ki jih je ponudil ukrajinski proizvajalec izvoznik, tj. odprta delniška družba „Zaporozhsky Abrasivny Combinat“.
The acceptance of this undertaking expired on 20 May 2005.
Sprejem te zaveze je potekel 20. maja 2005.
In January 2004 the Commission initiated a partial interim review [8] requested by Zaporozhsky Abrasivny Combinat, the Ukrainian exporting producer.
Januarja 2004 je Komisija začela izvajati delni vmesni pregled [8], za katerega je zaprosil ukrajinski proizvajalec izvoznik Zaporozhsky Abrasivny Combinat.
The applicant had alleged that following a significant change of circumstances it should be granted market economy treatment (MET) and that its dumping margin was significantly below the level of the measures in force.
Vložnik je navedel, da bi mu morala biti zaradi znatne spremembe okoliščin odobrena tržnogospodarska obravnava („TGO“) in da je njegova stopnja dampinga znatno pod ravnjo veljavnih ukrepov.
However, following an investigation, it was found that the company did not meet the criteria to be granted MET (Article 2(7)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 and the investigation was subsequently terminated through Council Regulation (EC) No 779/2005 [9].
Vendar je bilo po preiskavi ugotovljeno, da družba ni izpolnila meril za TGO (člen 2(7)(c) Uredbe (ES) št. 384/96), in preiskava je bila nato zaključena. Zaključena je bila z Uredbo Sveta (ES) št. 779/2005 [9].
Finally, on 30 June 2005 [10], the Commission initiated an anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of SiC originating in Romania, further to a complaint lodged by the European Chemical Industry Council (CEFIC) on behalf of producers representing 100 % of the total Community production of SiC.
Nazadnje je Komisija 30. junija 2005 [10] začela protidampinški postopek v zvezi z uvozom SK s poreklom iz Romunije, potem ko je Svet evropske kemične industrije („CEFIC“) vložil pritožbo v imenu proizvajalcev, ki predstavljajo 100 % celotne proizvodnje SK Skupnosti.
However, further to the withdrawal of the complaint by CEFIC on 1 March 2006, the investigation was terminated by Commission Decision 2006/423/EC [11].
Ker je CEFIC 1. marca 2006 umaknil pritožbo, je bila preiskava zaključena s Sklepom Komisije 2006/423/ES [11].
Following the publication of a notice of impending expiry of the anti-dumping measures in force of SiC originating in the PRC, Russia and Ukraine [12], the Commission received, on 24 February 2005, a request to review these measures pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation.
Po objavi obvestila o bližnjem izteku veljavnosti protidampinških ukrepov za SK s poreklom iz LRK, Rusije in Ukrajine [12] je Komisija 24. februarja 2005 prejela zahtevo za pregled teh ukrepov v skladu s členom 11(2) osnovne uredbe.
At the same time, the Commission received also a request to review the form of the measures applicable to imports of the product concerned originating in Russia pursuant to Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation.
Komisija je hkrati prejela zahtevo za pregled oblike ukrepov, veljavnih za uvoz zadevnega izdelka s poreklom iz Rusije v skladu s členom 11(3) osnovne uredbe.
These requests were lodged by the European Chemical Industry Council on behalf of producers representing 100 % of the total Community production of SiC.
Te zahtevke je vložil Svet evropske kemične industrije v imenu proizvajalcev, ki predstavljajo 100 % celotne proizvodnje SK Skupnosti.
The request for an expiry review was based on the grounds that the expiry of the measures would be likely to result in a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury to the Community industry.
Zahtevek za pregled zaradi izteka ukrepa je temeljil na utemeljitvi, da bi se damping in škoda, povzročena industriji Skupnosti, ob prenehanju veljavnosti ukrepov verjetno nadaljevala ali ponovila.
The request for an interim review was based on the fact that the form of the measures would be inappropriate and would not eliminate the injurious effects of the dumping.
Zahtevek za vmesni pregled je temeljil na dejstvu, da bi bila oblika ukrepov neprimerna in ne bi odpravila škodljivih učinkov dampinga.
Having determined, after consulting the Advisory Committee, that sufficient evidence existed for the initiation of an expiry review pursuant to Articles 11(2) and an interim review pursuant to Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation, the Commission initiated both reviews on the same date [13].
Komisija je po posvetovanju s svetovalnim odborom ocenila, da obstajajo zadostni dokazi za uvedbo pregleda zaradi izteka ukrepa v skladu s členom 11(2) in vmesnega pregleda v skladu s členom 11(3) osnovne uredbe, in z istim dnem začela izvajati oba pregleda [13].
The Commission officially advised the exporting producers, importers, raw material producers, users known to be concerned and their associations, the representatives of the exporting countries and the Community producers of the initiation of the expiry and the interim review.
Komisija je o uvedbi pregleda zaradi izteka ukrepa in vmesnega pregleda uradno obvestila proizvajalce izvoznike, uvoznike, proizvajalce surovin, uporabnike, za katere je bilo znano, da jih to zadeva, in njihova združenja, predstavnike držav izvoznic in proizvajalce Skupnosti.
Interested parties were given the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request a hearing within the time limit set out in the notice of initiation.
Zainteresirane stranke so imele možnost, da predložijo svoja pisna stališča in zahtevajo zaslišanje v roku, določenem v obvestilu o začetku.
In view of the large number of Chinese exporting producers and importers in the Community not related to an exporting producer in one of the countries concerned, it was considered appropriate, in conformity with Article 17 of the basic Regulation, to examine whether sampling should be used.
Glede na veliko število kitajskih proizvajalcev izvoznikov ter uvoznikov v Skupnosti, ki niso povezani s proizvajalcem izvoznikom v eni od zadevnih držav, se je zdelo v skladu s členom 17 osnovne uredbe primerno preučiti, ali je treba uporabiti vzorčenje.
In order to enable the Commission to decide whether sampling would indeed be necessary and, if so, to select a sample, the above parties were requested, pursuant to Article 17(2) of the basic Regulation, to make themselves known within two weeks of the initiation of the proceeding and to provide the Commission with the information requested in the notice of initiation.
Da bi Komisija lahko odločila, ali bi bilo vzorčenje resnično potrebno, in da bi lahko v tem primeru izbrala vzorec, so bile zgoraj navedene stranke v skladu s členom 17(2) osnovne uredbe pozvane, da se v dveh tednih od začetka postopka javijo Komisiji in predložijo informacije, zahtevane v obvestilu o začetku.
No Chinese exporting producer submitted the requested information and none cooperated in the present proceeding.
Noben kitajski proizvajalec izvoznik ni niti predložil zahtevanih informacij niti ni sodeloval v sedanjem postopku.
It was thus decided that sampling was not necessary with regard to the Chinese producers.
Zato je bilo sklenjeno, da za kitajske proizvajalce vzorčenje ni potrebno.
Six unrelated importers in the Community provided the information requested in the notice of initiation and expressed their willingness to cooperate in the further investigation.
Šest nepovezanih uvoznikov v Skupnosti je predložilo informacije, zahtevane v obvestilu o začetku, in izrazilo pripravljenost za sodelovanje v nadaljnji preiskavi.
From the above six importers, three companies were selected for the sample.
Od teh šestih uvoznikov so bile tri družbe izbrane v vzorec.
These importers represented the largest representative volume of imports of known importers in the Community (98 %), which could be investigated within the time available.
Ti uvozniki so predstavljali največji reprezentativni obseg uvoza znanih uvoznikov v Skupnosti (98 %), ki bi se lahko preiskali v času, ki je na voljo.
Questionnaires were therefore sent to the three sampled Community importers, to two Community producers, to 18 Community users, to 16 raw material suppliers and to the two known exporting producers in the Ukraine and in the Russian Federation.
Vprašalniki so bili poslani trem vzorčenim uvoznikom Skupnosti, dvema proizvajalcema Skupnosti, osemnajstim uporabnikom Skupnosti, šestnajstim dobaviteljem surovin in dvema znanima proizvajalcema izvoznikoma v Ukrajini in Rusiji.
In addition, two producers in Brazil, which was selected as the potential analogue country, were contacted and received a questionnaire.
Poleg tega so bili navezani stiki z dvema proizvajalcema v Braziliji, ki je bila izbrana kot možna primerljiva država, in sta tudi prejela vprašalnik.
Full replies to the questionnaires were received from the three sampled Community importers, seven users, two raw material producers and two exporting producers in the countries concerned, as well as from two producers in the analogue country.
Vprašalnik so v celoti izpolnili trije vzorčeni uvozniki Skupnosti, sedem uporabnikov, dva proizvajalca surovin, dva proizvajalca izvoznika v zadevnih državah ter dva proizvajalca iz primerljive države.
The Commission sought and verified all the information deemed necessary for its investigation, and carried out verification visits at the premises of the following companies:
Komisija je poiskala in preverila vse informacije, ki so bile po njenem mnenju potrebne za preiskavo, in opravila preveritvene obiske v prostorih naslednjih družb:
Kollo Silicon carbide BV (Netherlands), ESK-SIC GmbH (Germany),
Kollo Silicon carbide B.V. (Nizozemska), ESK-SK GmbH (Nemčija),
Navarro SiC, SA (Spain);
Navarro SK, S.A. (Španija).
Producers in the exporting countries:
Proizvajalci v državah izvoznicah:
JSC Zaporozhsky Abrasivny Combinat, Zaporozhsky (Ukraine),
JSC Zaporozhsky Abrasivny Combinat, Zaporozhsky (Ukrajina),
JSC Volzhsky Abrasive Combinat, Volzhsky (Russia);
JSC Volzhsky Abrasive Combinat, Volzhsky (Rusija).
Producers in the analogue country:
Proizvajalci v primerljivi državi:
Saint-Gobain Materials Cerámicas Ltda, Minas Gerais (Brazil),
Saint-Gobain Materials Cerámicas Ltda, Minas Gerais (Brazilija),
Treibacher Schleifmittel Brasil Ltda, Sao Paolo (Brazil);
Treibacher Schleifmittel Brasil Ltda, Sao Paolo (Brazilija).
Imexco-Ullrich GmbH (Germany),
Imexco-Ullrich GmbH (Nemčija),
Smyris Abrasivi (Italy);
Smyris Abrasivi (Italija).
Users the Community:
Uporabniki v Skupnosti:
Morganite Crucible Limited (United Kingdom),
Morganite Crucible Limited (Združeno kraljestvo),
TGA Ltd (Czech Republic).
TGA Ltd (Češka).
The investigation regarding the likelihood of a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury covered the period from 1 April 2004 to 31 March 2005 (investigation period or IP).
Preiskava v zvezi z verjetnostjo nadaljevanja ali ponovitve dampinga in škode je zajela obdobje od 1. aprila 2004 do 31. marca 2005 („obdobje preiskave“ ali „OP“).
The examination of the trends relevant for the assessment of a likelihood of a continuation or recurrence of injury covered the period from 1 January 2001 up to the end of the IP (period considered).
Preučitev gibanj, pomembnih za oceno verjetnosti nadaljevanja ali ponovitve škode, je zajelo obdobje od 1. januarja 2001 do konca OP („obravnavano obdobje“).
All the parties concerned were informed of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which the conclusions of this review were based.
Vse zadevne stranke so bile obveščene o bistvenih dejstvih in premislekih, ki so podlaga za sklepe tega pregleda.
They were also granted a period within which to make representations subsequent to this disclosure.
Po razkritju jim je bil odobren rok za predložitev stališč.
The representations received, within the deadlines, were carefully considered and where deemed appropriate, taken into account for the findings.
Stališča, prejeta v roku, so bila natančno preučena in, kadar se je zdelo primerno, so se upoštevala pri ugotovitvah.
The product concerned is the same as that in the original investigations which led to the imposition of measures currently in force, i.e. SiC.
Zadevni izdelek je enak kot v prvotnih preiskavah, na podlagi katerih so bili uvedeni trenutno veljavni ukrepi, in sicer silicijev karbid (SK).
SiC is currently classifiable within CN code 28492000.
SK se trenutno uvršča pod oznako KN 28492000.
SiC is produced by heating silicon and coke (or petroleum coke) at high temperatures (up to 2000 °C).
SK se proizvaja s segrevanjem silicija in koksa (ali naftnega koksa) pri visokih temperaturah (do 2000 °C).
The output of this process is crude SiC which is usually further processed for its final end-uses.
Rezultat tega postopka je surovi SK, ki ga je običajno treba nadalje predelati za končno uporabo.
The production process of SiC is such that the output automatically comprises a variety of grades related to different content concentration of silicon.
V proizvodnem procesu SK se avtomatično pridobiva silicijev karbid različnih kakovosti, povezanih z različno koncentracijo vsebnosti silicija.
The different grades can be segregated into two main grades: crystalline and metallurgical.
Različne kakovostne razrede je mogoče deliti v dve glavni kategoriji, in sicer kristalinično kakovost in metalurško kakovost.
The crystalline grade is considered to be of higher quality because it has higher silicon content.
Za kristalinično kakovost velja, da je višje kakovosti, ker ima večjo vsebnost silicija.
The crystalline grade is further classified under the types black and green.
Kristalinična kakovost se nadalje deli na črni in zeleni tip.
The crystalline grade is normally used in the manufacturing of abrasive tools, grinding wheels, high-quality refractory products, technical ceramics, while the metallurgical grade is normally used in foundry and blast-furnace operations as a silicon carrier.
Kristalinična kakovost se praviloma uporablja za izdelavo brusilnega orodja, brusilnih plošč, ognjevarnih izdelkov visoke kakovosti, tehnične keramike, medtem ko se metalurška kakovost običajno uporablja v livarnah in visokih pečeh kot nosilec silicija.
As in the previous investigations, both grades have to be considered as forming one product for the purpose of this investigation.
Kot v prejšnjih preiskavah je za namen te preiskave obe kakovosti treba šteti za en sam izdelek.
As established in the original investigations, the current investigation confirmed that the product concerned and the products manufactured and sold by the exporting producers on their domestic markets, as well as those manufactured and sold by the Community producers on the Community market and by the producer in the analogue country on the domestic market of the analogue country have the same basic physical and chemical characteristics and end uses and are therefore considered to be like products within the meaning of Article 1(4) of the basic Regulation.
Kot je bilo ugotovljeno v prvotnih preiskavah, je sedanja preiskava potrdila, da imajo zadevni izdelek in izdelki, ki jih proizvajajo in prodajajo proizvajalci izvozniki na svojih notranjih trgih, ter izdelki, ki jih proizvajajo in prodajajo proizvajalci Skupnosti na trgu Skupnosti, ter izdelki, ki jih proizvaja in prodaja proizvajalec iz primerljive države na notranjem trgu primerljive države, enake osnovne fizikalne in kemijske lastnosti in končne uporabe ter jih je zato treba obravnavati kot podobne izdelke v smislu člena 1(4) osnovne uredbe.
LIKELIHOOD OF A CONTINUATION AND/OR RECURRENCE OF DUMPING
VERJETNOST NADALJEVANJA IN/ALI PONOVITVE DAMPINGA
In this expiry review, full cooperation from the two known producers in Ukraine and the Russian Federation was obtained.
V tem pregledu zaradi izteka ukrepa je bilo doseženo polno sodelovanje dveh znanih proizvajalcev v Ukrajini in Ruski federaciji.
However, as mentioned in recital 12, no producer came forward from the PRC.
Kot je omenjeno v uvodni izjavi (12), se ni javil noben proizvajalec iz LRK.
Since the Ukraine [14] and the PRC were not considered as market economy countries during the investigation period (and in the preceding investigations), normal value had to be established in accordance with Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation, i.e. based on information obtained in a market economy third country where the product was produced and sold domestically.
Ker Ukrajina [14] in LRK med obdobjem preiskave (in v prejšnjih preiskavah) nista veljali za državi s tržnim gospodarstvom, je bilo treba normalno vrednost določiti v skladu s členom 2(7)(a) osnovne uredbe, tj. na podlagi informacij, pridobljenih v tretji državi s tržnim gospodarstvom, v kateri se je izdelek proizvajal in prodajal.
Moreover, it is recalled that the exporting producer in Ukraine had not been able to obtain MET in an interim review which was concluded just before the initiation of this expiry review (see recital 5).
Poleg tega je treba spomniti, da proizvajalec izvoznik v Ukrajini ni mogel pridobiti TGO v vmesnem pregledu, ki se je zaključil ravno pred uvedbo tega pregleda zaradi izteka ukrepa (glej uvodno izjavo (5)).
In the initiation of this expiry review, it was envisaged to use Brazil as an analogue country from where information about production costs and domestic sales could be obtained.
Ob uvedbi tega pregleda zaradi izteka ukrepa je bilo predvideno, da se kot primerljiva država, od katere bi lahko pridobili informacije o proizvodnih stroških in prodaji na notranjem trgu, uporabi Brazilija.
It is recalled that Brazil has also been used in the previous expiry review.
Spomniti je treba, da je bila Brazilija uporabljena tudi v prejšnjem pregledu zaradi izteka ukrepa.