natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The President
Izvedbena uredba Komisije (EU) 2015/392 z dne 9. marca 2015 o zaključku pregleda v zvezi z „novim izvoznikom“ v okviru Izvedbene uredbe Sveta (EU) št. 1389/2011 o uvedbi dokončne protidampinške dajatve na uvoz triklorizocianurne kisline s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske, ponovni uvedbi dajatve na uvoz od zadevnega izvoznika in prenehanju registracije tega uvoza ( UL L 65, 10.3.2015, str. 18).
OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 21.
Obvestilo o bližnjem izteku nekaterih protidampinških ukrepov (UL C 117, 2.4.2016, str. 9).
Council Regulation (EC) No 1631/2005 of 3 October 2005 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of trichloroisocyanuric acid originating in the People's Republic of China and the United States of America (OJ L 261, 7.10.2005, p. 1).
Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 1225/2009 z dne 30. novembra 2009 o zaščiti proti dampinškemu uvozu iz držav, ki niso članice Evropske skupnosti (UL L 343, 22.12.2009, str.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1389/2011 of 19 December 2011 imposing definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of trichloroisocyanuric acid originating in the People's Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 (OJ L 346, 30.12.2011, p. 6).
Ta uredba je bila razveljavljena in nadomeščena z osnovno uredbo.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 569/2014 of 23 May 2014 amending Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1389/2011 imposing definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of trichloroisocyanuric acid originating in the People's Republic of China following a new exporter review pursuant to Article 11(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 (OJ L 157, 27.5.2014, p. 80).
Obvestilo o začetku pregleda zaradi izteka protidampinških ukrepov, ki se uporabljajo za uvoz triklorizocianurne kisline s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske (UL C 476, 20.12.2016, str. 6).
Juancheng Kangtai Chemical Co.
Tretji znani proizvajalec Unije je predložil le delno izpolnjen vprašalnik.
Ltd
Po začetku je Komisija iz opredelitve pojma industrija Unije (glej oddelek D.1, opredelitev pojmov industrija Unije in proizvodnja Unije) izključila enega proizvajalca.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/392 of 9 March 2015 terminating a new exporter review of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1389/2011 imposing definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of trichloroisocyanuric acid originating in the People's Republic of China, re-imposing the duty with regard to imports from the exporter and terminating the registration of these imports (OJ L 65, 10.3.2015, p. 18).
Po ocenah naj bi zajemal najmanj 10000 ton letno.
Notice of the impending expiry of certain anti-dumping measures (OJ C 117, 2.4.2016, p. 9).
Sodelujoča proizvajalca izvoznika sta Komisijo obvestila, da obstaja še tretji japonski proizvajalec TCCA, tj. Nankai Chemical Co.
51).
Po navedbah sodelujočih japonskih proizvajalcev TCCA na japonskem trgu prodaja samo LRK.
This Regulation was repealed and replaced by the basic Regulation.
Po podatkih iz zbirke podatkov o kitajskem izvozu je LRK v obdobju preiskave v zvezi s pregledom Japonski prodala približno 1500 ton TCCA.
Notice of initiation of an expiry review of the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of trichloroisocyanuric acid originating in the People's Republic of China (OJ C 476, 20.12.2016, p. 6).
V skladu z zahtevkom za pregled redna carina znaša 4,6 % za oznako HS 2933 69 in 4,9 % za oznako HS 3808 94.
The third known Union producer provided a partial questionnaire reply only.
Izvedbena uredba (EU) št. 1389/2011, uvodna izjava 35 (UL L 346, 30.12.2011, str. 6).
After the initiation the Commission excluded one of the producers from the definition of Union industry (see section D.1, definition of the Union industry and Union production).
Vir: CEFIC (Svet evropske kemijske industrije) in tržne informacije vložnikov, str. 38 zahtevka za pregled.
Estimated to be at least 10000 tonnes annually.
Zbirka podatkov o kitajskem izvozu.
The two cooperating exporting producers informed the Commission that a third Japanese TCCA producer existed, Nankai Chemical Co.
Zahtevek za pregled, str. 33.
Ltd.
Povprečne ravni kitajskih izvoznih cen so se zelo razlikovale glede na namembno državo.
According to the cooperating Japanese producers only the PRC is selling TCCA on the Japanese market.
Najvišje ravni cen so bile ugotovljene za namembne države, kot so ZDA, Brazilija, Argentina in Južna Afrika (v padajočem vrstnem redu po količini prodaje).
According to the Chinese Export Database, the PRC sold roughly 1500 tonnes of TCCA to Japan during the review investigation period.
Glavne namembne države z ravnmi cen, nižjimi od cene izvoza v Unijo, so v padajočem vrstnem redu vključevale Mehiko, Indonezijo, Tajsko, Indijo in Vietnam.
According to the review request the regular customs duty is 4,6 % for HS code 2933 69 and 4,9 % for HS code 3808 94.
Zbirka podatkov o kitajskem izvozu vsebuje eno kodo KN za TCCA, kar pomeni, da ni informacij o točni mešanici izdelka (tablete oziroma granule/prah).
Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1389/2011, recital 35 (OJ L 346, 30.12.2011, p. 6).
Vendar pa glede na to, da je po podatkih Eurostata večina kitajskega izvoza v Unijo zajemala granule, tj. cenejšo različico zadevnega izdelka, in glede na to, da se za namene te preiskave v zvezi s pregledom za zadevni izdelek štejejo vse oblike TCCA, to ne bi smelo vplivati na rezultat primerjave cen.
Source: CEFIC (European Chemical Industry Council) and market intelligence of the applicants, p. 38 of the review request.
Ercros S.A., Inquide S.A.U. in 3VSIGMA.
The average Chinese export price levels varied greatly depending on the country of destination.
V zbirki podatkov o kitajskem izvozu so cene navedene na ravni FOB.
The main destinations with price levels below the export price to the Union included, in descending order, Mexico, Indonesia, Thailand, India and Vietnam.
Leta 2013 ni bilo nobenih naložb.
The Chinese Export Database has one CN code for TCCA meaning that there is no information on the exact product mix (tablets v granules/powder).
Uredba (ES) št. 1631/2005.
Nevertheless, given that, based on Eurostat, most of Chinese exports to the Union consisted of granules, i.e. the cheaper version of the product concerned, and given that all forms of TCCA are considered as the product concerned for the purposes of this review investigation, the outcome of the price comparison should not be affected.
PRILOGA
Ercros SA, Inquide S.A.U. and 3VSIGMA.
Izjava, ki jo podpiše uradnik subjekta, ki je izdal trgovinski račun, mora biti na veljavnem trgovinskem računu iz člena 1(3) v naslednji obliki:
The product concerned is manufactured in different forms falling into two main categories: granular and powder products on the one hand and tablets on the other.
Ime in položaj pooblaščene osebe subjekta, ki je izdal trgovinski račun.
Prices for tablets are higher than prices for granular and/or powder products.
Naslednja izjava:
This means that the prices of the product concerned may vary according to the variation in composition of the given product mix.
„Podpisani potrjujem, da je (količina) triklorizocianurne kisline, prodane za izvoz v Evropsko unijo, ki ga zajema ta trgovinski račun, proizvedla družba (ime in statutarni sedež družbe) (dodatna oznaka TARIC) v Ljudski republiki Kitajski.
In other words, a product mix containing a higher proportion of tablets would be more expensive than a product mix containing comparatively more granular and powder products.
Izjavljam, da so podatki na tem trgovinskem računu popolni in resnični.
The Chinese Export Database provides prices at FOB levels.
Datum in podpis“
These were adjusted upwards by the average transportation costs to the Union as well as post importation costs to obtain an estimated Union landed price.
Komisija je 28. avgusta 2013 in 1. julija 2014 začela dva pregleda glede novega izvoznika.
See recital 41 above for an estimate thereof.
Z Izvedbeno uredbo (EU) št. 569/2014 [5] je Komisija uvedla individualno dajatev v višini 32,8 % na TCCA, ki jo proizvaja novi kitajski proizvajalec izvoznik [6].
Chinese CIF export prices were adjusted by 6-8 %.
Cene uvoza LRK so v celotnem obravnavanem obdobju, razen leta 2015, ostale nižje od cen industrije Unije.
Regulation (EC) No 1631/2005.
Raven zalog se je med letoma 2013 in 2014 znižala za 40 % in je leta 2015 ostala v istem razponu.
ANNEX
Višja raven zalog ob koncu OPP izraža zmanjšanje prodaje v istem obdobju.
A declaration signed by an official of the entity issuing the commercial invoice, in the following format, must appear on the valid commercial invoice referred to in Article 1(3):
Prvotni ukrepi so bili uvedeni oktobra 2005.
The name and function of the official of the entity issuing the commercial invoice.
Kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi 89, je industrija Unije v OPP dosegla donos, ki je bil daleč od ciljnega 10-odstotnega dobička, določenega v prvotni preiskavi [28].
The following declaration:
Te so bile prilagojene navzgor s povprečnimi stroški prevoza v Unijo in s stroški po uvozu, da se pridobi približna cena Unije z vsemi stroški, vključno z raztovarjanjem.
‘I, the undersigned, certify that the (volume) of trichloroisocyanuric acid sold for export to the European Union covered by this invoice was manufactured by (company name and registered seat) (TARIC additional code) in the People's Republic of China.
Za oceno glej uvodno izjavo 41.
I declare that the information provided in this invoice is complete and correct.
To pomeni, da se cene zadevnega izdelka lahko razlikujejo glede na različno sestavo dane mešanice izdelka, tj. mešanica izdelka, ki vsebuje večji delež tablet, bo dražja od mešanice izdelka, ki vsebuje razmeroma več izdelkov v obliki granul in prahu.
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2231
Izvedbena uredba Komisije (EU) 2017/2231
amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/329 as regards the name of the holder of the authorisation of 6-phytase
o spremembi Izvedbene Uredbe (EU) 2016/329 glede imena imetnika dovoljenja za 6-fitazo
Kaesler Nutrition GmbH has submitted an application in accordance with Article 13(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 proposing to change the name of the holder of the authorisation stated in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/329 [2].
Evropska agencija za varnost hrane je bila o zahtevku obveščena.
The applicant has submitted relevant data supporting its request.
Izvedbeno uredbo (EU) 2016/329 bi bilo zato treba ustrezno spremeniti.
The proposed change of the holder of the authorisation is purely administrative in nature and does not entail a fresh assessment of the additives concerned.
Ker ni varnostnih razlogov, ki bi zahtevali takojšnjo uporabo sprememb, uvedenih s to uredbo, je ustrezno zagotoviti prehodno obdobje, v katerem se lahko krmni dodatek 6-fitaza ter premiksi in krmne mešanice, ki vsebujejo navedeni krmni dodatek, ki so skladni z določbami, ki so se uporabljale pred datumom začetka veljavnosti te uredbe, še naprej dajejo na trg in uporabljajo do porabe obstoječih zalog.
The European Food Safety Authority was informed of the application.
Ukrepi iz te uredbe so v skladu z mnenjem Stalnega odbora za rastline, živali, hrano in krmo –
In order to enable Kaesler Nutrition GmbH to exploit its marketing rights, it is necessary to change the name of the holder in the authorisation.
SPREJELA NASLEDNJO UREDBO:
Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/329 should therefore be amended accordingly.
Člen 1
Since safety reasons do not require the immediate application of the amendments provided for by this Regulation, it is appropriate to provide for a transitional period during which the feed additive 6-phytase, as well as premixtures and compound feed containing that feed additive, which are in conformity with the provisions applying before the date of entry into force of this Regulation may continue to be placed on the market and used until the existing stocks are exhausted.
Sprememba Izvedbene uredbe (EU) 2016/329
The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed,
Izvedbena uredba (EU) 2016/329 se spremeni:
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
v naslovu se besedilo „imetnik dovoljenja Lohmann Animal Nutrition GmbH“ nadomesti z besedilom „imetnik dovoljenja Kaesler Nutrition GmbH“;
Article 1
v Prilogi se v drugem stolpcu tabele z naslovom „Ime imetnika dovoljenja“ besedilo „Lohmann Animal Nutrition GmbH“ nadomesti z besedilom „Kaesler Nutrition GmbH“.
Amendment to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/329
Člen 2
Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/329 is amended as follows:
Prehodni ukrepi
in the title, the words ‘holder of the authorisation Lohmann Animal Nutrition GmbH’, are replaced by the words ‘holder of the authorisation Kaesler Nutrition GmbH’;
Krmni dodatek 6-fitaza, kot je določen v Prilogi k Uredbi (EU) 2016/329, ter premiksi in krmne mešanice, ki vsebujejo navedeni dodatek, proizvedeni in označeni pred 25. decembrom 2017 po pravilih, ki se uporabljajo pred 25. decembrom 2017, se lahko še naprej dajejo na trg in uporabljajo do porabe obstoječih zalog.
in the Annex, in the second column of the table, entitled ‘Name of the holder of authorisation’, the words ‘Lohmann Animal Nutrition GmbH’ are replaced by the words ‘Kaesler Nutrition GmbH’.
Člen 3
The feed additive 6-phytase as set out in the Annex to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/329, as well as premixtures and compound feed containing that additive, which are produced and labelled before 25 December 2017 in accordance with the rules applicable before 25 December 2017 may continue to be placed on the market and used until the existing stocks are exhausted.
Ta uredba je v celoti zavezujoča in se neposredno uporablja v vseh državah članicah.
This Regulation is binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
UL L 268, 18.10.2003, str. 29.
Done at Brussels, 4 December 2017.
Izvedbena uredba Komisije (EU) 2016/329 z dne 8. marca 2016 o izdaji dovoljenja za 6-fitazo kot krmni dodatek za vse aviarne vrste ter odstavljene pujske, prašiče za pitanje, svinje in manj pomembne vrste prašičev (imetnik dovoljenja Lohmann Animal Nutrition GmbH) (UL L 62, 9.3.2016, str. 5).
For the Commission
Imetnik dovoljenja za krmni dodatek 6-fitaza, Lohmann Animal Nutrition GmbH, je spremenil svoje poslovno ime v „Kaesler Nutrition GmbH“ z učinkom od 3. julija 2017.
The President
Vložnik je predložil ustrezne podatke, ki podpirajo njegovo zahtevo.
OJ L 268, 18.10.2003, p. 29.
ob upoštevanju Uredbe Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta (ES) št. 1831/2003 z dne 22. septembra 2003 o dodatkih za uporabo v prehrani živali [1] in zlasti člena 13(3) uredbe,
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2232
Izvedbena uredba Komisije (EU) 2017/2232
reimposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain footwear with uppers of leather originating in the People's Republic of China and Vietnam and produced by certain exporting producers in the People's Republic of China and Vietnam and implementing the judgment of the Court of Justice in Joined Cases C-659/13 and C-34/14
o ponovni uvedbi dokončne protidampinške dajatve in dokončnem pobiranju začasne dajatve na uvoz določene obutve z zgornjim delom iz usnja s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske in Vietnama, ki jo proizvajajo nekateri proizvajalci v Ljudski republiki Kitajski in Vietnamu, ter o izvršitvi sodbe Sodišča v združenih zadevah C-659/13 in C-34/14
Having regard to Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union (‘the basic Regulation’) [1], and in particular Article 9(4) and 14(1) and (3) thereof,
ob upoštevanju Uredbe (EU) 2016/1036 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 8. junija 2016 o zaščiti proti dampinškemu uvozu iz držav, ki niso članice Evropske unije („osnovna uredba“) [1], in zlasti člena 9(4) ter člena 14(1) in (3) Uredbe,
On 23 March 2006, the Commission adopted Regulation (EC) No 553/2006 imposing provisional anti-dumping measures on imports of certain footwear with uppers of leather (‘footwear’) originating in the People's Republic of China (‘PRC’ or ‘China’) and Vietnam (‘the provisional Regulation’) [2].
Komisija je 23. marca 2006 sprejela Uredbo Komisije (ES) št. 553/2006 o uvedbi začasne protidampinške dajatve na uvoz določene obutve z zgornjim delom iz usnja („obutev“) s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske („LRK“ ali „Kitajska“) in Vietnama („začasna uredba“) [2].
By Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006 [3], the Council imposed definitive anti-dumping duties ranging from 9,7 % to 16,5 % on imports of certain footwear with uppers of leather, originating in Vietnam and in the PRC for two years (‘Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006’ or ‘the contested Regulation’).
Z Uredbo (ES) št. 1472/2006 [3] je Svet uvedel dokončne protidampinške dajatve v višini 9,7 % do 16,5 % na uvoz določene obutve z zgornjim delom iz usnja s poreklom iz Vietnama in LRK za dve leti („Uredba (ES) št. 1472/2006“ ali „izpodbijana uredba“).
By Regulation (EC) No 388/2008 [4], the Council extended the definitive anti-dumping measures on imports of certain footwear with uppers of leather originating in the PRC to imports consigned from the Macao Special Administrative Region (‘SAR’), whether declared as originating in the Macao SAR or not.
Z Uredbo Sveta (ES) št. 388/2008 [4] je Svet dokončne protidampinške ukrepe za uvoz določene obutve z zgornjim delom iz usnja s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske razširil na uvoz izdelkov, poslanih iz Posebne upravne regije Macao, ne glede na to, ali so deklarirani kot izdelki s poreklom iz Posebne upravne regije Macao ali ne.
Further to an expiry review initiated on 3 October 2008 [5], the Council further extended the anti-dumping measures for 15 months by Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1294/2009 [6], i.e. until 31 March 2011, when the measures expired (‘Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1294/2009’).
Po pregledu zaradi izteka ukrepov, ki se je začel 3. oktobra 2008 [5], je Svet z Izvedbeno uredbo (EU) št. 1294/2009 [6] protidampinške ukrepe podaljšal za 15 mesecev, tj. do 31. marca 2011, ko so ukrepi prenehali veljati („Izvedbena uredba (EU) št. 1294/2009“).
Brosmann Footwear (HK) Ltd, Seasonable Footwear (Zhongshan) Ltd, Lung Pao Footwear (Guangzhou) Ltd and Risen Footwear (HK) Co.
Družbe Brosmann Footwear (HK) Ltd, Seasonable Footwear (Zhongshan) Ltd, Lung Pao Footwear (Guangzhou) Ltd, Risen Footwear (HK) Co Ltd in Zhejiang Aokang Shoes Co.
Ltd as well as Zhejiang Aokang Shoes Co.
Ltd („vložniki“) so izpodbijano uredbo izpodbijale na Sodišču prve stopnje (zdaj: Splošno sodišče).
By judgments of 4 March 2010 in Case T-401/06 Brosmann Footwear (HK) and Others v Council and of 4 March 2010 in Joined Cases T-407/06 and T-408/06 Zhejiang Aokang Shoes and Wenzhou Taima Shoes v Council the General Court rejected those challenges.
Vložniki so se na ti sodbi pritožili.
The applicants appealed those judgments.
V sodbah z dne 2. februarja 2012 v zadevi Brosmann Footwear (HK) in drugi proti Svetu, C-249/10 P, ter z dne 15. novembra 2012 v zadevi Zhejiang Aokang Shoes proti Svetu, C-247/10 P, („sodbi v zadevah Brosmann in Aokang“), je Sodišče navedeni sodbi razveljavilo.
In its judgments of 2 February 2012 in case C-249/10 P Brosmann Footwear (HK) and Others v Council and of 15 November 2012 in case C-247/10 P Zhejiang Aokang Shoes v Council (‘the Brosmann and Aokang judgments’), the Court of Justice set aside those judgments.
Menilo je, da je Splošno sodiščenapačno uporabilo pravo, ko je navedlo, da Komisija ni bila zavezana preučitvi zahtevkov za tržnogospodarsko obravnavo („TGO“), ki so temeljili na členu 2(7)(b) in (c) osnovne uredbe in so jih predložili trgovci, ki niso zajeti z vzorcem (točka 36 sodbe v zadevi C-249/10 P ter točki 29 in 32 sodbe v zadevi C-247/10 P).
It held that the GeneralCourt erred in law in so far as it held that the Commission was not required to examine requests for market economy treatment (‘MET’) under Article 2(7)(b) and (c) of the basic Regulation from non-sampled traders (paragraph 36 of the judgment in Case C-249/10 P and paragraph 29 and 32 of the judgment in Case C-247/10 P).
Sodišče je nato razsodilo.
It held that ‘the Commission ought to have examined the substantiated claims submitted to it by the appellants pursuant to Article 2(7)(b) and (c) of the basic regulation for the purpose of claiming MET in the context of the anti-dumping proceeding [which is] the subject of the contested regulation.
Dalje, ugotoviti je treba, da ni izključeno, da bi jim bila zaradi take preučitve naložena dokončna protidampinška dajatev, ki bi bila drugačna od dajatve 16,5 %, ki se je zanje uporabila na podlagi člena 1(3) sporne uredbe.
It must next be found that it cannot be ruled out that such an examination would have led to a definitive anti-dumping duty being imposed on the appellants other than the 16,5 % duty applicable to them pursuant to Article 1(3) of the contested regulation.
Iz iste določbe namreč izhaja, da je bila dokončna protidampinška dajatev 9,7 % naložena le kitajskemu gospodarskemu subjektu, ki je bil zajet z vzorcem in ki mu je bila odobrena TGO.
It is apparent from that provision that a definitive anti-dumping duty of 9,7 % was imposed on the only Chinese trader in the sample which obtained MET.
Vendar, kot izhaja iz točke 38 te sodbe, če bi Komisija ugotovila, da pogoji tržnega gospodarstva prevladujejo tudi za pritožnice, bi se tem – če izračun individualne stopnje dampinga ne bi bil mogoč – prav tako morala odobriti ta zadnja stopnja“ (točka 42 sodbe v zadevi C-249/10 P in točka 36 sodbe v zadevi C-247/10 P).
As a consequence, it annulled the contested Regulation, in so far as it relates to the applicants concerned.
Komisija je oktobra 2013 z obvestilom, objavljenim v Uradnem listu Evropske unije [7], sporočila, da je sklenila obnoviti protidampinški postopek v točki, v kateri je prišlo do nezakonitosti, in preučiti, ali so za vložnike prevladovali pogoji tržnega gospodarstva v obdobju od 1. aprila 2004 do 31. marca 2005.
In October 2013, the Commission, by means of a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union [7], announced that it had decided to resume the anti-dumping proceeding at the very point at which the illegality occurred and to examine whether market economy conditions prevailed for the applicants for the period from 1 April 2004 to 31 March 2005.
S tem obvestilom je zainteresirane strani pozvala, naj se ji javijo.
That notice invited interested parties to come forward and make themselves known.
Svet je marca 2014 z Izvedbenim sklepom Sveta 2014/149/EU [8] zavrnil predlog Komisije za sprejetje izvedbene uredbe Sveta o ponovni uvedbi dokončne protidampinške dajatve in dokončnem pobiranju začasne dajatve na uvoz določene obutve z zgornjim delom iz usnja s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske, ki jo proizvajajo podjetja Brosmann Footwear (HK) Ltd, Seasonable Footwear (Zhongshan) Ltd, Lung Pao Footwear (Guangzhou) Ltd, Risen Footwear (HK) Co Ltd in Zhejiang Aokang Shoes Co.
In March 2014, the Council, by Council Implementing Decision 2014/149/EU [8], rejected a Commission proposal to adopt a Council 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 ter ustavil postopke v zvezi s temi proizvajalci.
Ltd and Zhejiang Aokang Shoes Co.
Svet je zavzel stališče, da so uvozniki, ki so obutev kupili od navedenih proizvajalcev izvoznikov in ki so jim pristojni nacionalni organi povrnili ustrezne uvozne dajatve na podlagi člena 236 Uredbe (EGS) št. 2913/1992 z dne 12. oktobra 1992 o carinskem zakoniku Skupnosti [9] („carinski zakonik Skupnosti“), imeli legitimna pričakovanja na podlagi člena 1(4) izpodbijane uredbe, ki prevzema določbe carinskega zakonika Skupnosti, zlasti člena 221, ki se uporablja za pobiranje dajatev.