natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
It should also be possible for institutions to recognise as eligible collateral instruments that are liquid relative to the markets in which they are operating and meet a minimum level of liquidity, irrespective of whether a market is established in the Union or in a third country.
Prav tako bi moralo biti mogoče, da institucije kot primerno zavarovanje s premoženjem priznajo instrumente, ki so likvidni glede na trge, na katerih delujejo, in ki dosegajo minimalno raven likvidnosti ne glede na to, ali je trg v Uniji ali v tretji državi.
Therefore, an equity index should be considered as a main index where it includes no more than half of the total number of companies whose shares are traded on the market on which the index is based, where the average daily turnover is at least EUR 100000, and where it also meets two of the following three criteria: the total market capitalisation of the index is at least 40 % of the market capitalisation of all the companies whose shares are traded on that market; the total turnover of trading in the components of the index is at least 40 % of the total turnover of all equity trading on that market; and the index serves as an underlying for derivatives products.
Zato bi bilo treba delniški indeks obravnavati kot glavni borzni indeks, kadar ne vključuje več kot polovice celotnega števila podjetij, s katerih delnicami se trguje na trgu, na katerem temelji indeks, kadar je povprečni dnevni promet vsaj 100000 EUR in kadar izpolnjuje dve od naslednjih treh meril: skupna tržna kapitalizacija indeksa znaša vsaj 40 % tržne kapitalizacije vseh družb, s katerih delnicami se trguje na navedenem trgu; skupni promet trgovanja s sestavinami indeksa je vsaj 40 % skupnega prometa vseh delnic, s katerimi se trguje na navedenem trgu; indeks služi kot osnova za produkte izvedenih finančnih instrumentov.
Convertible bond indices should be considered as main indices only where the constituent bonds can be converted into equities where at least 90 % of those equities have a free float of at least EUR 500000000 or, in the absence of information about free float, a market capitalisation of at least EUR 1000000000.
Indeksi zamenljivih obveznic bi se morali obravnavati kot glavni borzni indeksi samo, kadar je obveznice, ki jih sestavljajo, mogoče zamenjati za lastniške instrumente, pri čemer ima vsaj 90 % teh lastniških instrumentov prosti obtok v višini vsaj 500000000 EUR ali, kadar ni informacij o prostem obtoku, ima tržno kapitalizacijo vsaj 1000000000 EUR.
Where two indices meet the criteria to be considered a main index and one is a subset of the other, for simplicity only the broader one should be included in the list of main indices.
Kadar pogoje za obravnavo kot glavni borzni indeks izpolnjujeta dva indeksa in je prvi podindeks drugega, se zaradi preprostosti v seznam glavnih borznih indeksov vključi samo širši indeks.
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 states that debt securities issued by certain institutions, not having a credit assessment by an external credit assessment institution (ECAI) may be used as eligible collateral where they fulfil a number of conditions, one of them being that they are listed on a recognised exchange.
Uredba (EU) št. 575/2013 določa, da se dolžniški vrednostni papirji, ki so jih izdale določene institucije, ki nimajo bonitetne ocene zunanje bonitetne institucije (ECAI), lahko uporabljajo kot primerno zavarovanje s premoženjem, če izpolnjujejo več pogojev, en izmed katerih je, da kotirajo na priznani borzi.
In order to be considered a recognised exchange for the purposes of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, an exchange is required to meet the conditions laid down in Article 4(1)(72) of that Regulation.
Da bi se borza obravnavala kot priznana borza za namene Uredbe (EU) št. 575/2013, mora izpolnjevati pogoja, določena v členu 4(1)(72) navedene uredbe.
Regarding one of those conditions, namely that the exchange should have a clearing mechanism, all regulated markets trading financial instruments not listed in Annex II to Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 should satisfy this second condition by virtue of being licensed as a regulated market under Directive 2004/39/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council [2] and by virtue of the existence of rules and procedures for the clearing and settlement of transactions in place as required under that Directive 2004/39/EC.
Glede na enega od navedenih pogojev, in sicer da mora borza imeti klirinški mehanizem, bi morali vsi regulirani trgi, ki trgujejo s finančnimi instrumenti, ki niso navedeni v Prilogi II k Uredbi (EU) št. 575/2013, izpolnjevati to drugo merilo, ker imajo dovoljenje kot regulirani trgi v skladu z Direktivo 2004/39/ES in ker imajo vzpostavljena pravila in postopke za kliring in poravnavo poslov, kot se zahteva v skladu z Direktivo 2004/39/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta [2].
Where an exchange's clearing mechanism is provided by a central counterparty (CCP), that CCP should comply with the requirements laid down in Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council [3].
Kadar klirinški mehanizem borze zagotavlja centralna nasprotna stranka (CNS), bi morala navedena CNS izpolnjevati zahteve iz Uredbe (EU) št. 648/2012 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta [3].
For the rare derivatives exchanges not served by CCPs, the margining rules laid down in Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 should be used as the benchmark for assessing whether the margining requirements imposed by those exchanges are appropriate.
Za redke borze izvedenih finančnih instrumentov, za katere CNS ne opravljajo storitev, se pravila o kritjih iz Uredbe (EU) št. 648/2012 uporabljajo kot referenčno merilo za ocenjevanje, ali so zahteve po kritju, ki jih določajo navedene borze, ustrezne.
This Regulation is based on the draft implementing technical standards submitted by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) to the Commission.
Ta uredba temelji na osnutku izvedbenih tehničnih standardov, ki ga je Evropski organ za vrednostne papirje in trge (ESMA) predložil Komisiji.
On 17 December 2015, the Commission notified ESMA of its intention to endorse the draft implementing technical standard with amendments to take account of the fact that some equity indices that meet the eligibility criteria to be considered as main indices were not included in the list provided in that draft standard.
Komisija je 17. decembra 2015 obvestila ESMA o svoji nameri, da potrdi osnutek izvedbenega tehničnega standarda s spremembami, da bi se upoštevalo dejstvo, da nekateri delniški indeksi, ki izpolnjujejo merila primernosti za obravnavo kot glavni borzni indeksi, niso bili vključeni na seznam v osnutku standarda.
In its formal opinion of 28 January 2016, ESMA confirmed its initial position and did not resubmit an implementing technical standard amended in a way consistent with the Commission's proposed amendments.
V svojem uradnem mnenju z dne 28. januarja 2016 je ESMA potrdila svoje prvotno stališče in ni ponovno predložila izvedbenega tehničnega standarda, spremenjenega v skladu s predlaganimi spremembami Komisije.
The draft implementing technical standard should therefore be endorsed with the amendments necessary to avoid the exclusion of indices that meet the eligibility criteria to be considered as main indices for the purposes of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.
Osnutek izvedbenega tehničnega standarda bi zato bilo treba potrditi s spremembami, ki so potrebne, da se izogne izključitvi indeksov, ki izpolnjujejo merila primernosti za obravnavo kot glavni borzni indeksi za namene Uredbe (EU) št. 575/2013.
ESMA has conducted an open public consultation on the draft implementing technical standards on which this Regulation is based and has requested the opinion of the Securities and Markets Stakeholder Group established in accordance with Article 37 of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council [4].
ESMA je opravila javno posvetovanje o osnutku izvedbenih tehničnih standardov, na katerem temelji ta uredba, in zaprosila za mnenje interesno skupino za vrednostne papirje in trge, ustanovljeno v skladu s členom 37 Uredbe (EU) št. 1095/2010 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta [4].
ESMA has not analysed in detail the potential costs and benefits related to the draft implementing technical standards as this would have been disproportionate in relation to their scope and impact,
ESMA ni natančno analizirala morebitnih stroškov in koristi, povezanih z osnutkom izvedbenih tehničnih standardov, saj bi bilo to neproporcionalno glede na njihovo področje uporabe in vpliv –
Main indices
Glavni borzni indeksi
The main indices for the purposes of Article 197(8)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 are specified in Annex I to this Regulation.
Glavni borzni indeksi za namene člena 197(8)(a) Uredbe (EU) št. 575/2013 so navedeni v Prilogi I k tej uredbi.
Recognised exchanges
Priznane borze
The recognised exchanges for the purposes of Article 197(8)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 are specified in Annex II to this Regulation.
Priznane borze za namene člena 197(8)(b) Uredbe (EU) št. 575/2013 so navedene v Prilogi II k tej uredbi.
Directive 2004/39/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on markets in financial instruments amending Council Directives 85/611/EEC and 93/6/EEC and Directive 2000/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directive 93/22/EEC (OJ L 145, 30.4.2004, p.
Direktiva 2004/39/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 21. aprila 2004 o trgih finančnih instrumentov in o spremembah direktiv Sveta 85/611/EGS, 93/6/EGS in Direktive 2000/12/ES Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta ter o razveljavitvi Direktive Sveta 93/22/EGS (UL L 145, 30.4.2004, str. 1).
1).
Uredba (EU) št. 648/2012 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 4. julija 2012 o izvedenih finančnih instrumentih OTC, centralnih nasprotnih strankah in repozitorijih sklenjenih poslov (UL L 201, 27.7.2012, str. 1).
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on OTC derivatives, central counterparties and trade repositories (OJ L 201, 27.7.2012, p. 1).
Uredba (EU) št. 1095/2010 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 24. novembra 2010 o ustanovitvi Evropskega nadzornega organa (Evropski organ za vrednostne papirje in trge) in o spremembi Sklepa št. 716/2009/ES ter razveljavitvi Sklepa Komisije 2009/77/ES (UL L 331, 15.12.2010, str. 84).
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Securities and Markets Authority), amending Decision No 716/2009/EC and repealing Commission Decision 2009/77/EC (OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 84).
PRILOGA I
ANNEX I
GLAVNI BORZNI INDEKSI, DOLOČENI V SKLADU S ČLENOM 197 UREDBE (EU) št. 575/2013
MAIN INDICES SPECIFIED UNDER ARTICLE 197 OF REGULATION (EU) No 575/2013
Razpredelnica 1
Table 1
Delniški indeksi
Equity indices
Država/območje
Country/Area
Azija, Pacifik
Asia/Pacific
Avstralija
Australia
Avstrija
Belgium
Brazilija
Canada
Srednja Evropa
Central Europe
Češka
Denmark
trgi v razvoju
Emerging Markets
Evropa
Europe
Evropa in Bližnji vzhod
Europe and Middle East
Finska
Germany
svetovni
Global
Grčija
Greece
Hongkong
India
Irska
Italy
Latinska Amerika
Latin America
Mehika
Mexico
Nizozemska
Netherlands
Nova Zelandija
Norway
Poljska
Poland
Rusija
South Korea
Španija
Sweden
Švica
Switzerland
ZAE
UAE
ZDA
USA
Razpredelnica 2
Table 2
Indeksi zamenljivih obveznic
Convertible bond indices
Vključuje ATX.
Includes the ATX.
Vključuje CAC40, CAC Next 20 in CAC Mid Cap.
Includes the CAC40, CAC Next 20, and CAC Mid Cap.
Vključuje DAX in MDAX.
Includes the DAX and MDAX.
Vključuje FTSE 100.
Includes the FTSE 100.
PRILOGA II
ANNEX II
PRIZNANE BORZE, DOLOČENE V SKLADU S ČLENOM 197 UREDBE (EU) št. 575/2013
RECOGNISED EXCHANGES SPECIFIED UNDER ARTICLE 197 OF REGULATION (EU) No 575/2013
Priznane borze, na katerih se ne trguje s pogodbami, navedenimi v Prilogi II k Uredbi (EU) št. 575/2013
Recognised exchanges on which contracts listed in Annex II of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 are not traded
Regulirani trgi
BOERSE MUENCHEN (REGULIERTER MARKT)
MERCADO DE FUTUROS DE ACEITE DE OLIVA – S.A.
SPOT REGULATED MARKET — BMFMS
Indeks
SPOT REGULATED MARKET — BVB
Japonska
LONDON STOCK EXCHANGE — REGULATED MARKET
Malezija
BULGARIAN STOCK EXCHANGE — SOFIA JSC
Tajvan
Recognised exchanges on which contracts listed in Annex II of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 are traded
Kitajska
MERCADO DE FUTUROS DE ACEITE DE OLIVA — SA
Portugalska
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1647
Izvedbena uredba Komisije (EU) 2016/1647
Re-imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitely the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain footwear with uppers of leather originating in Vietnam and produced by Best Royal Co.
Ponovna uvedba dokončne protidampinške dajatve in dokončno pobiranje začasne dajatve, uvedene na uvoz določene obutve z zgornjim delom iz usnja s poreklom iz Vietnama, ki jo proizvajajo družbe Best Royal Co.
Ltd, Lac Cuong Footwear Co., Ltd, Lac Ty Co., Ltd, Saoviet Joint Stock Company (Megastar Joint Stock Company), VMC Royal Co Ltd, Freetrend Industrial Ltd and its related company Freetrend Industrial A (Vietnam) Co, Ltd, Fulgent Sun Footwear Co., Ltd, General Shoes Ltd, Golden Star Co, Ltd, Golden Top Company Co., Ltd, Kingmaker Footwear Co.
Ltd, Lac Cuong Footwear Co., Ltd, Lac Ty Co., Ltd, Saoviet Joint Stock Company (Megastar Joint Stock Company), VMC Royal Co Ltd, Freetrend Industrial Ltd. in z njo povezana družba Freetrend Industrial A (Vietnam) Co, Ltd., Fulgent Sun Footwear Co., Ltd, General Shoes Ltd, Golden Star Co, Ltd, Golden Top Company Co., Ltd, Kingmaker Footwear Co.
Ltd, Tripos Enterprise Inc., Vietnam Shoe Majesty Co., Ltd, and implementing the judgment of the Court of Justice in joined cases C-659/13 and C-34/14
Ltd., Tripos Enterprise Inc., Vietnam Shoe Majesty Co., Ltd, ter izvajanje sodbe Sodišča v združenih zadevah C-659/13 in C-34/14
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
EVROPSKA KOMISIJA
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’), and in particular to Article 266 thereof,
ob upoštevanju Pogodbe o delovanju Evropske unije in zlasti člena 266 Pogodbe,
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 and 14 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], ter zlasti člena 9 in člena 14 Uredbe,
On 23 March 2006, the Commission adopted Regulation (EC) No 553/2006 [2] imposing provisional anti-dumping measures on imports of certain footwear with uppers of leather (‘footwear’) originating in the People's Republic of China (‘PRC’) and Vietnam (‘the provisional Regulation’).
Komisija je 23. marca 2006 sprejela Uredbo (ES) št. 553/2006 [2] („začasna uredba“).
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 (‘Council Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006’ or ‘the contested Regulation’).
Z Uredbo (ES) št. 1472/2006 [3] je Svet uvedel dokončne protidampinške dajatve v višini od 9,7 % do 16,5 % na uvoz določene obutve z zgornjim delom iz usnja s poreklom iz Vietnama in LRK za dve leti („Uredba Sveta (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 upper 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 (ES) št. 388/2008 [4] je Svet dokončne protidampinške ukrepe na 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 ukrepa, ki se je začel 3. oktobra 2008 [5], je Svet z Izvedbeno uredbo (EU) št. 1294/2009 [6] podaljšal protidampinške ukrepe za 15 mesecev, t.j. do 31. marca 2011, ko so ukrepi prenehali veljati („Izvedbena uredba (EU) št. 1294/2009“).
By judgments of 4 March 2010 in Case T-401/06 Brosmann Footwear (HK) and Others v Council [2010] ECR II-671 and of 4 March 2010 in Joined Cases T-407/06 and T-408/06 Zhejiang Aokang Shoes and Wenzhou Taima Shoes v Council [2010] ECR II-747, the General Court rejected those challenges.
S sodbama z dne 4. marca 2010 v zadevi T-401/06, Brosmann Footwear (HK) in drugi proti Svetu, ZOdl.
The applicants appealed those judgments.
2010, str.
Ltd (‘the Brosmann and Aokang judgments’), the Court of Justice set aside those judgments.
2010, str.
It held that the General Court 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).
II-747, jih je Splošno sodišče zavrnilo.
The Court of Justice then gave judgment itself in the matter.
Vložniki so se na ti sodbi pritožili.
It held: ‘[…] 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.
V sodbah z dne 2. februarja 2012 v zadevi C-249/10 P, Brosmann in drugi, ter z dne 15. novembra 2012 v zadevi C-247/10P, Zhejiang Aokang Shoes Co.
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.
Ltd („sodbi v zadevah Brosmann in Aokang“), je Sodišče ti sodbi razveljavilo.
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.
Menilo je, da je Splošno sodišče napačno uporabilo pravo, ko je navedlo, da Komisija ni bila zavezana preučiti 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).
As is apparent from paragraph 38 above, had the Commission found that the market economy conditions prevailed also for the appellants, they ought, when the calculation of an individual dumping margin was not possible, also to have benefited from the same rate’ (paragraph 42 of the judgment in Case C-249/10 P and paragraph 36 of the judgment in Case C-247/10 P).
Sodišče je nato razsodilo.
As a consequence, it annulled the contested Regulation, in so far as it relates to the applicants concerned.
Ugotovilo je: „[…] Komisija [bi] morala preučiti ustrezno utemeljene zahtevke, ki so ji jih pritožnice predložile na podlagi člena 2(7)(b) in (c) osnovne uredbe, da bi se jim v okviru protidampinškega postopka, na katerega se sporna uredba nanaša, odobrila TGO.
In October 2013, the Commission by means of 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 and invited interested parties to come forward and make themselves known.
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.
In March 2014, the Council, by Council Implementing Decision 2014/149/EU [8], rejected a Commission proposal to adopt a Council Implementing Regulation re-imposing 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.
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.
Ltd and terminated the proceedings with regard to these producers.
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).
The Council took the view that importers having bought shoes from those exporting producers, to whom the relevant customs duties had been reimbursed by the competent national authorities on the basis of Article 236 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code [9] (‘the Community Customs Code’), had acquired legitimate expectations on the basis of Article 1(4) of the contested Regulation, which had rendered the provisions of the Community Customs Code [10], and in particular its Article 221, applicable to the collection of the duties.
Zato je razglasilo ničnost izpodbijane uredbe v tistem delu, ki se nanaša na zadevne vložnike.
Three importers of the product concerned, C&J Clark International Ltd (‘Clark’), Puma SE (‘Puma’) and Timberland Europe B.V.
Komisija je oktobra 2013 z obvestilom, objavljenim v Uradnem listu Evropske unije [7], sporočila, da je sklenila obnoviti protidampinški postopek v točki, na kateri je prišlo do nezakonitosti, in proučiti, ali so v obdobju med 1. aprilom 2004 in 31. marcem 2005 za vložnike prevladali pogoji tržnega gospodarstva, ter je zainteresirane strani pozvala, naj se ji javijo.
(‘Timberland’) (‘the importers concerned’) challenged the anti-dumping measures on imports of certain footwear from China and Vietnam invoking the jurisprudence mentioned in recitals (5) to (7) before their national Courts, which referred the matters to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling.
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 določeno obutev z zgornjim delom iz usnja s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske, ki jo proizvajajo družbe Brosmann Footwear (HK) Ltd, Seasonable Footwear (Zhongshan) Ltd, Lung Pao Footwear (Guangzhou) Ltd, Risen Footwear (HK) Co Ltd in Zhejiang Aokang Shoes Co.
In the joined Cases C-659/13 C & J Clark International Limited and C-34/14 Puma SE, the Court of Justice declared 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 (‘the judgments’), contrary to the requirements laid down in Articles 2(7)(b) and 9(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 [11].
Ltd, postopke v zvezi s temi proizvajalci pa je ustavil.