natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
FESI further claimed that the current approach does not have any precedents and that the Commission did also not provide any reasoning or prior jurisprudence which would support its interpretation of Article 266 TFEU.
V tej zadevi so se zadevne protidampinške dajatve nanašale samo na izdelke, ki so v prosti promet vstopili po začetku veljavnosti začasne in izpodbijane (dokončne) uredbe, sprejete v skladu s členom 7(1) oziroma 9(4) osnovne uredbe.
FESI also argued that in this case the investigation cannot be resumed at the very point where the illegality occurred under Article 266 TFEU because the Court of Justice did not merely establish a lack of reasoning but the illegality concerned a core legal provision of the basic Regulation affecting the entire assessment of dumping related to the exporting producers concerned.
Vendar se retroaktivnost v smislu člena 10(1) osnovne uredbe nanaša samo na stanje, v katerem je bilo blago sproščeno v prosti promet, preden so bili uvedeni ukrepi, kot je mogoče razbrati iz samega besedila navedene določbe, kakor tudi iz odstopanja, ki ga določa člen 10(4) osnovne uredbe.
FESI claimed further that the retroactive correction of expired measures violates the principle of protection of legitimate expectations.
Komisija ugotavlja tudi, da v obravnavanem primeru ni prisotna niti retroaktivnost niti kršitev pravne varnosti in legitimnih pričakovanj.
FESI argued that first, parties would have received assurance that the measures expired on 31 March 2011 and that given the time elapsed since the original investigation, parties were entitled to have justified expectations that the original investigation will not be resumed or reopened.
Kar zadeva retroaktivnost, sodna praksa Sodišča pri ocenjevanju, ali je ukrep retroaktiven, razlikuje med dodelitvijo novega pravila okoliščinam, ki so postale dokončne (tudi obstoječ ali dokončni pravni položaj), in okoliščinami, ki so nastale pred začetkom veljavnosti novega predpisa, vendar še niso dokončne (tudi začasne okoliščine).
Secondly, the very fact that during the original investigation MET claims were not investigated within the 3 months deadline provided legal certainty to the Vietnamese and Chinese exporting producers that their MET claims will indeed not be reviewed.
V tej zadevi okoliščine uvoza zadevnih izdelkov, do katerih je prišlo med obdobjem uporabe Uredbe (ES) št. 1472/2006, še niso postale dokončne, ker zaradi razglasitve ničnosti izpodbijane uredbe protidampinška dajatev, ki velja za te izdelke, še ni bila dokončno določena.
In conclusion, the parties claimed that given the long time periods involved, the resumption of the investigation violated the universal principle of prescription or limitation which applies in all legal contexts.
Hkrati so bili uvozniki obutve z objavo obvestila o začetku postopka in začasne uredbe opozorjeni glede morebitne uvedbe takšne dajatve.
FESI further argued that neither Article 266 TFEU, nor the basic Regulation permit the retroactive reimposition of the definitive duty of 10 % and 16,5 % respectively to imports of the Vietnamese and Chinese exporting producers concerned.
Ustaljena sodna praksa sodišč Unije je, da gospodarski subjekti ne morejo imeti legitimnih pričakovanj, dokler instituciji nista sprejeli akta, s katerim se zaključi upravni postopek, ki je postal dokončen.
As regards the claim that the measures in question expired on 31 March 2011, the Commission fails to see why the expiry of the measure would be of any relevance for the possibility for the Commission to adopt a new act to replace the annulled act following a judgment annulling the initial act.
Ta uredba predstavlja neposredno uporabo za bodoče učinke položaja, ki je v teku: Nacionalni carinski organi so pobrali dajatve na obutev.
According to the case-law referred to in recital (15) above, the administrative procedure should be resumed at the point in time where the illegality occurred.
Zaradi zahtevkov za povračilo, o katerih še ni bilo dokončno odločeno, ti predstavljajo položaj, ki je v teku.
The anti-dumping proceedings are hence, as a result of the annulment of the act concluding the proceedings, still open.
Ta uredba določa stopnjo dajatve, ki se uporablja za navedeni uvoz, s čimer ureja bodoče učinke položaja, ki je v teku.
The Commission is under an obligation to close those proceedings; Article 9 of the basic Regulation provides that an investigation has to be closed by an act of the Commission.
V vsakem primeru, tudi če bi šlo za retroaktivnost v smislu prava Unije, quod non, bi bila ta retroaktivnost upravičena iz naslednjih razlogov:
As to the claim concerning retroactivity based on Article 10 of the basic Regulation and Article 10 of the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement (‘WTO ADA’), Article 10(1) of the basic Regulation, which follows the text of Article 10(1) of the WTO ADA, stipulates that provisional measures and definitive anti-dumping duties shall only be applied to products which enter free circulation after the time when the decision taken pursuant to Article 7(1) or 9(4) of the basic Regulation, as the case may be, enters into force.
Materialnopravni predpisi Unije se lahko uporabljajo za dejanska stanja, ki so nastala pred začetkom njihove veljavnosti, če iz njihovega besedila, cilja ali strukture jasno izhaja, da se jim lahko prizna tak učinek.
In the present case, the anti-dumping duties in question are only applied to products which entered into free circulation after the provisional and the contested (definitive) Regulation taken pursuant to 7(1) and 9(4) of the basic Regulation respectively had entered into force.
Zlasti v zadevi C-337/88 Società agricola fattoria alimentare (SAFA) je Sodišče menilo, da: [Č]eprav načelo pravne varnosti praviloma nasprotuje temu, da bi akt Skupnosti začel veljati pred objavo, je lahko izjemoma drugače, če to zahteva cilj, ki ga je treba doseči, in če se ustrezno upoštevajo upravičena pričakovanja zainteresiranih oseb.
Retroactivity in the sense of Article 10(1) of the basic Regulation, however, refers only to a situation where the goods were introduced into free circulation before measures were introduced, as can be seen from the very text of that provision as well as from the exception for which Article 10(4) of the basic Regulation provides.
V tej zadevi je namen skladnost z obveznostjo Komisije v skladu s členom 266 PDEU.
The Commission also observes that there is neither retroactivity nor violation of legal certainty and legitimate expectations involved in the present case.
Ker je Sodišče v sodbah iz uvodne izjave 12 ugotovilo nezakonitost samo glede določanja veljavne stopnje dajatve in ne glede uvedbe ukrepov (tj. glede ugotovitve o dampingu, škodi in interesu Unije), zadevni proizvajalci izvozniki niso mogli legitimno pričakovati, da dokončni protidampinški ukrepi ne bodo uvedeni.
As to retroactivity, the case-law of the Court distinguishes, when assessing whether a measure is retroactive, between the application of a new rule to a situation that has become definitive (also referred to as an existing or definitively established legal situation), and a situation that started before the entry into force of the new rule, but which is not yet definitive (also referred to as a temporary situation).
Zato za uvedbo, tudi če bi bila retroaktivna, quod non, ni mogoče trditi, da krši legitimna pričakovanja.
In the present case, the situation of the imports of the products concerned that occurred during the period of application of Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006 has not yet become definitive, because, as a result of the annulment of the contested Regulation, the anti-dumping duty applicable to them has not yet been definitively established.
Poleg tega se glede zaščite pravne varnosti in varstva legitimnih pričakovanj najprej ugotavlja, da v skladu s sodno prakso uvozniki ne morejo zahtevati zaščite pravne varnosti in varstva legitimnih pričakovanj v primerih, ko so bili obveščeni o skorajšnji spremembi trgovinske politike Unije.
At the same time, importers of footwear were warned that such a duty may be imposed by the publication of the Notice of Initiation and the provisional Regulation.
V tej zadevi so bili uvozniki z objavo obvestila o začetku postopka in začasne uredbe v Uradnem listu, ki sta oba še vedno del pravnega reda Unije, opozorjeni na tveganje, da bi za izdelke zadevnih proizvajalcev izvoznikov lahko bila uvedena protidampinška dajatev.
It is standing case-law of the Union Courts that operators cannot acquire legitimate expectations until the Institutions have adopted an act closing the administrative procedure, which has become definitive.
Zadevni proizvajalci izvozniki se zato ne morejo sklicevati na pravno varnost in legitimna pričakovanja.
The present Regulation constitutes immediate application to the future effects of a situation that is ongoing: The duties on footwear have been levied by national customs authorities.
Nasprotno, gospodarski subjekti so se pri uvozu obutve iz LRK in Vietnama v celoti zavedali, da se za uvoz pobirajo dajatve.
As a result of the requests for reimbursement, which have not been decided in a definitive way, they constitute an ongoing situation.
Navedene dajatve so upoštevali pri določanju prodajnih cen in ocenjevanju ekonomskih tveganj.
The present Regulation sets out the duty rate applicable to those imports, and hence regulates the future effects of an ongoing situation.
Zato niso pridobili pravne varnosti ali legitimnih pričakovanj, da bo uvoz prost dajatev, stroške dajatev pa so običajno prenesli na svoje stranke.
In any event, even if there was retroactivity in the sense of Union law, quod non, such retroactivity would in any event be justified, for the following reason:
Zato je v interesu Unije, da raje zdaj določi stopnjo dajatve, kot da zadevnim uvoznikom zagotovi nepričakovan dobiček, s katerim bi se neupravičeno obogatili.
The substantive rules of Union law may apply to the situations existing before their entry into force in so far as it clearly follows from their terms, objectives or general scheme that such effect must be given to the them.
Zato ne gre za kršitev načel zastaranja, pravne varnosti in varstva legitimnih pričakovanj, kakor tudi ne določb osnovne uredbe in PDS STO.
In particular, in case C-337/88 Società agricola fattoria alimantare (SAFA) it was held that: [A]lthough in general the principle of legal certainty precludes a Community measure from taking effect from a point in time before its publication, it may exceptionally be otherwise where the purpose to be achieved so demands and where the legitimate expectations of those concerned are duly respected.
Glede trditve, da bi bilo treba TGO določiti v treh mesecih po začetku, je treba opozoriti, da v skladu s sodno prakso drugi pododstavek člena 2(7)(c) osnovne uredbe ne navaja nobenih posledic, če Komisija ne upošteva trimesečnega roka.
In the present case the purpose is to comply with the obligation of the Commission pursuant to Article 266 TFEU.
Splošno sodišče zato meni, da odločitev o TGO, ki je sprejeta pozneje, ne vpliva na veljavnost uredbe o uvedbi dokončnih ukrepov, če seveda vložniki ne dokažejo, da bi Svet, če Komisija ne bi presegla trimesečnega roka, morda sprejel drugačno uredbo, ki bi bila za varstvo njihovih interesov ugodnejša od izpodbijane uredbe.
Since, in the judgments referred to in recital (12) above, the Court only found an illegality with regards to the determination of the applicable duty rate, and not with regards to the imposition of the measures themselves (that is, with regards to the finding of dumping, injury and Union interest), the exporting producers concerned could not have legitimately expected that no definitive anti-dumping measures would be imposed.
Poleg tega je Sodišče ugotovilo, da lahko instituciji oceno TGO spreminjata do sprejetja končnih ukrepov.
Consequently, that imposition, even if it was retroactive, quod non, cannot be construed as breaching legitimate expectations.
Sodbi Brosmann in Aokang iz uvodne izjave 6 nista spremenili zgoraj navedene sodne prakse.
In addition, with regards to the protection of legal certainty and of legitimate expectations, it is first of all observed that according to the case-law, importers cannot claim the protection of legal certainty and legitimate expectations where they were alerted of an imminent change in the Union's commercial policy.
V sodbah Brosmann in Aokang se Sodišče sklicuje na obveznost Komisije, da mora oceno sprejeti v treh mesecih, da bi dokazalo, da ta obveznost glede ocene obstaja neodvisno od tega, ali Komisija uporabi vzorčenje ali ne.
In the present case, importers were alerted by the publication of the Notice of Initiation and of the provisional Regulation in the Official Journal, which are both still part of the legal order of the Union, of the risk that the products produced by the exporting producers concerned may become subject to an anti-dumping duty.
Sodišče se ni opredelilo glede vprašanja, kakšna je pravna posledica, če Komisija oceno TGO izvede v poznejši fazi preiskave.
The exporting producers concerned could therefore not invoke legal certainty and legitimate expectations.
Sodišče je samo presodilo, da instituciji ne moreta popolnoma prezreti zahtevkov za TGO, ampak jih morata oceniti najpozneje ob uvedbi dokončnih ukrepov.
Rather, economic operators were fully aware, when importing footwear from the PRC and Vietnam, that those imports were subject to a duty.
Sodbi potrjujeta sodno prakso, navedeno v prejšnji uvodni izjavi.
They took that duty into account when setting sales prices and assessing economic risks.
V tej zadevi zadevni proizvajalci izvozniki niso dokazali, da bi v primeru, če bi Komisija oceno TGO sprejela v treh mesecih po začetku protidampinškega postopka leta 2005, Svet morda sprejel drugačno uredbo, ki bi bila za varstvo njihovih interesov ugodnejša od izpodbijane uredbe.
They therefore did not acquire legal certainty or legitimate expectations that the imports would be free of a duty, and usually passed on the duty to their customers.
Zahtevek na podlagi zastaranja roka za oceno zahtevka za TGO se zato zavrne.
It is therefore in the Union interest to set now the applicable duty rate, rather than providing a windfall gain to the importers concerned, which would be enriched without due cause.
Združenje FESI, ki se sklicuje na sodbo Splošnega sodišča v zadevi IPS proti Svetu, T-2/95, je opozorilo na formalne razlike med „preiskavo“ in „postopkom“ ter trdilo, da ko je postopek zaključen, kot v trenutnem primeru, ga ni mogoče več nadaljevati.
There is hence neither violation of the principles of prescription, legal certainty and legitimate expectations, nor of the provisions of the basic Regulation and the WTO ADA.
Komisija ne vidi nobene bistvene razlike med izrazoma „preiskava“ in „postopek“ v okviru izvrševanja zadevnih sodb.
As regards the claim that the MET determination had to be completed within three months of the initiation, it is recalled that according to the case-law, the second subparagraph of Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation does not contain any indication as regards the consequences of the Commission's failure to comply with the three-month period.
Sodbe se nanašajo na nepravilnost v zvezi s posebno preiskavo kot del postopka, ki jo je Komisija dolžna odpraviti, kot je pojasnjeno v uvodnih izjavah 23 do 31.
The General Court therefore takes the view that an MET decision at a later stage does not affect the validity of the Regulation imposing definitive measures as long as applicants have not proved that, if the Commission had not exceeded the three-month period, the Council might have adopted a different Regulation more favourable to their interests than the contested Regulation.
V vsakem primeru je sodbo v zadevi T-2/95 potrebno brati v luči sodbe o pritožbi v tej zadevi.
The Court has furthermore recognised that the Institutions may modify the MET assessment until the adoption of final measures.
Združenje FESI je tudi trdilo, da člen 266 PDEU ne omogoča delnega izvajanja sodbe Sodišča in, v sedanji zadevi, obrnjenega dokaznega bremena.
The above case-law has not been overturned by the Brosmann and Aokang judgments referred to in recital (6) above.
Zato je združenje FESI trdilo, da je Komisija napačno ocenila samo zahtevke za TGO/IO tistih proizvajalcev izvoznikov, ki so bili dobavitelji uvoznikov, ki so vložili zahtevek za povračilo.
In the Brosmann and Aokang judgments, the Court relies on the obligation for the Commission to carry out the assessment in three months in order to show that the obligation of that assessment exists independently of whether the Commission applies sampling or not.
Združenje FESI je svojo trditev utemeljilo na razumevanju, da je učinek sodbe Sodišča v združenih primerih C-659/13 C & J Clark International Limited in C-34/14 Puma SE erga omnes in da ne more biti izključeno, da imajo rezultati trenutne ocene zahtevkov za TGO/IO vpliv tudi na preostalo dajatev, ki se uporablja za vse kitajske in vietnamske proizvajalce izvoznike.
The Court does not pronounce itself on the question what legal consequence it has if the Commission concludes the MET assessment at a later stage of the investigation.
Združenje FESI je zato trdilo, da bi morala Komisija oceniti vse zahtevke za TGO/IO, ki so bili predloženi med prvotno preiskavo.
The Court only rules that the Institutions could not completely ignore MET claims, but had to assess them at the latest when imposing definitive measures.
Poleg tega se združenje FESI ne strinja, da leži dokazno breme na proizvajalcu, ki želi vložiti zahtevek za TGO/IO, in trdi, da so proizvajalci temu dokaznemu bremenu zadostili v letu 2005, ko so med prvotno preiskavo izpolnili zahtevke za TGO/IO.
The judgments confirm the case-law quoted in the preceding recital
Prav tako se združenje FESI ni strinjalo, da je sodba Sodišča v združenih zadevah C-659/13 C & J Clark International Limited in C-34/14 Puma SE lahko izvedena s preprosto oceno zahtevkov za TGO/IO s strani nevzorčenih proizvajalcev izvoznikov, saj Sodišče ni izrecno določilo, da je ugotovljena razveljavitev dejansko omejena na ta vidik.
In the present case, the exporting producers concerned have not shown that, had the Commission carried out the MET assessment within three months after the initiation of the anti-dumping procedure in 2005, the Council might have adopted a different Regulation more favourable to their interests than the contested Regulation.
Komisija meni, da je izvajanje sodbe obvezno samo za tiste proizvajalce izvoznike, za katere vse uvozne transakcije niso postale dokončne.
The claim on time-bar for the assessment of the MET claim is therefore rejected.
Ko je poteklo obdobje treh let, kot predpisuje člen 236 carinskega zakonika Skupnosti, je dajatev postala dokončna, kot je bilo potrjeno v sodbah.
FESI, referring to the judgment of the General Court in Case T-2/95 IPS v Council, pointed to the formal difference between an ‘investigation’ and a ‘proceeding’ and argued that once a proceeding is terminated, like in the current case, it cannot be resumed anymore.
Kakršen koli vpliv na preostale dajatve je izključen, ker je bil zahtevek za TGO/IO za družbe v vzorcu ocenjen, in dejstvo, da je bil odobren zahtevek za TGO/IO eni od družb zunaj vzorca ne vpliva na stopnjo preostale dajatve.
The Commission fails to see any material difference between the terms ‘investigation’ and ‘proceeding’ in the context of the implementation of the judgments at stake.
Dokazno breme ni omejeno na vložitev zahtevka.
The judgments concern an irregularity with regard to a specific investigation as part of a proceeding which the Commission is under an obligation to remedy as explained in recitals (23) to (31) above.
Nanaša se na vsebino zahtevka, ki mora dokazati, da so izpolnjeni vsi pogoji za TGO/IO.
In any event, the judgment in case T-2/95 has to be read in the light of the judgment on appeal in that case.
Edina nezakonitost, opredeljena v sodbah, je odsotnost ocene zahtevkov za TGO/IO.
FESI also claimed that Article 266 TFEU does not allow for a partial implementation of a judgment of the Court of Justice and in the current case the reversal of the burden of proof.
Te trditve se zato zavrnejo.
Thus, FESI claimed that the Commission wrongly assessed only the MET/IT requests of those exporting producers that were suppliers of importers that filed reimbursements claims.
Pravna podlaga za ponovno uvedbo dajatev
FESI based its claim on the understanding that the effect of the judgment of the Court of Justice in the Joined Cases C-659/13 C & J Clark International Limited and C-34/14 Puma SE is erga omnes and that it cannot be excluded that the results of the current assessment of the MET/IT claims has also an impact on the residual duty which is applicable to all Chinese and Vietnamese exporting producers.
Združenje FESI je trdilo, da Komisija ne bi smela uporabljati dveh različnih pravnih režimov, tj. osnovne uredbe pred spremembo za ocenjevanje zahtevkov za IO proizvajalcev izvoznikov na eni strani in sedanje osnovne uredbe na drugi strani, ki je vključevala spremembe Uredbe (EU) št. 1168/2012 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta, in uvedla postopke komitologije na področju, med drugim, trgovinske zaščite ter s tem prenesla odločanje na Komisijo.
FESI therefore claimed that the Commission should have assessed all MET/IT claims that were provided during the original investigation.
Združenje FESI je hkrati ponovno poudarilo, da člen 266 PDEU ne dovoljuje uvedbe retroaktivnih protidampinških dajatev, kar bi bilo potrjeno tudi s sodbo Sodišča v zadevi C-459/98P, IPS proti Svetu, in Uredbo Sveta (ES) št. 1515/2001.
Moreover, FESI disagreed that the burden of proof lies with the producer wishing to claim MET/IT arguing that producers had discharged this burden of proof in 2005 by filing the MET/IT requests during the original investigation.
Združenje FESI je trdilo, da Komisija ni podala nobenega utemeljenega razloga za odstopanje od načela prepovedi retroaktivnosti in je zato kršila načelo upravičenih pričakovanj.
FESI also disagreed that the judgment of the Court of Justice in the Joined Cases C-659/13 C & J Clark International Limited and C-34/14 Puma SE can be implemented by simply assessing the MET/IT requests submitted by the non-sampled exporting producers as the Court of Justice did not specifically outline that the invalidation found is indeed limited to this aspect.
Združenje FESI je tudi trdilo, da ponovna uvedba dokončnih protidampinških ukrepov na uvoz kitajskih in vietnamskih proizvajalcev izvoznikov, ki jih zadeva sedanje izvajanje, pomeni (i) diskriminacijo uvoznikov, ki jih zadeva trenutno izvajanje napram uvoznikom, ki jih zadeva sedanje izvajanje sodb Brosmann in Aokang iz uvodne izjave 6 in ki so jim bile povrnjene dajatve, plačane za uvoz obutve od petih proizvajalcev izvoznikov, ki so jih prav tako zadevale te sodbe, kot tudi (ii) diskriminacijo proizvajalcev izvoznikov, ki jih zadeva sedanje izvajanje napram petim proizvajalcem izvoznikom, ki jih zadevajo sodbe Brosmann in Aokang, ki niso postale predmet nobene dajatve v skladu z Izvedbenim sklepom Sveta 2014/149/EU.
The Commission considers that the implementation of the judgment is only necessary for those exporting producers for which not all import transactions have become definitive.
Trdile so, da to diskriminatorno vedenje odraža pomanjkanje enotne razlage in uporabe prava EU, kar je v nasprotju s temeljno pravico do učinkovitega sodnega varstva.
Indeed, once the three year prescription period foreseen in Article 236 of the Community Customs Code has expired, the duty has become definitive, as confirmed in the judgments.
V zvezi z domnevno uporabo različnih pravnih režimov Komisija meni, da to izhaja iz razlik v prehodnih pravilih treh uredb, ki spreminjajo trenutno osnovno uredbo.
Any impact on the residual duty is excluded, because the MET/IT claim for the companies in the sample has been assessed, and the fact of granting MET/IT to one of the companies outside the sample does not affect the residual duty rate.
Prvič, Uredba (EU) št. 765/2012 (tako imenovana „Pritrdilna sprememba“ o IO) v členu 2 določa, da „se uporablja za vse preiskave, začete v skladu z Uredbo (ES) št. 1225/2009 po začetku veljavnosti te uredbe“.