natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In addition, Cortina argued that unlike during the original investigation, the Commission's measures would de facto and de jure affect only importers, whereas they have no means of providing any meaningful input and cannot require their suppliers to cooperate with the Commission.
V zvezi s trditvijo, da uvoznik ne more zagotoviti pomembnih informacij, Komisija ugotavlja, da uvozniki nimajo pravice do obrambe, saj protidampinški ukrep ni usmerjen zoper njih, temveč zoper proizvajalce izvoznike.
The Commission observes that nothing in the basic Regulation requires the Commission to give exporting companies claiming MET/IT the possibility to complete lacking factual information.
Poleg tega so imeli uvozniki možnost, da pripombe v zvezi s tem predložijo že v upravnem postopku pred sprejetjem izpodbijane uredbe.
It recalls that according to the case-law, the burden of proof lies with the producer wishing to claim MET/IT under Article 2(7)(b) of the basic Regulation.
Če so uvozniki menili, da je v zvezi s tem prišlo do nepravilnosti, bi s svojimi dobavitelji morali sprejeti potrebne pogodbene dogovore, da bi zagotovili razpolaganje s potrebno dokumentacijo.
On the contrary, it is for the Commission to assess whether the evidence supplied by the producer concerned is sufficient to show that the criteria laid down in the first subparagraph of Article 2(7)(c) of the basic Regulation are fulfilled in order to grant it MET/IT (see above recital (44).
Zato je treba to trditev zavrniti.
The right to be heard concerns the assessment of those facts, but does not comprise the right to remedy deficient information.
Družba Cortina je trdila, da Komisija ni preučila, ali bi bila uvedba protidampinških dajatev v interesu Unije, ter da bi bili ukrepi v nasprotju z interesom Unije, saj (i) so ukrepi že imeli želeni učinek, ko so bili prvič uvedeni, (ii) ukrepi ne bi prinesli nobene dodatne koristi za industrijo Unije, (iii) ukrepi ne bi vplivali na proizvajalce izvoznike in (iv) bi ukrepi pomenili pomemben strošek za uvoznike v Uniji.
Otherwise, the exporting producer could prolong indefinitely the assessment, by providing information piece by piece.
V obravnavanem primeru gre le za zahtevke za TGO/IO, saj je to edina točka, na kateri je bila storjena pravna napaka, ugotovljena s strani sodišč Unije.
In that regard, it is recalled that there is no obligation, for the Commission, to request the exporting producer to complement the MET/IT claim.
V interesu Unije ostaja ocena iz Uredbe (ES) št. 1472/2006 v celoti veljavna.
As mentioned in the preceding recital, the Commission may base their assessment on the information submitted by the exporting producer.
Hkrati je ta ukrep upravičen z namenom zaščite finančnega interesa Unije.
In any event, the exporting producers concerned have not contested the assessment of their MET/IT claims by the Commission, and they have not identified which documents or which people they have no longer been able to rely upon.
Družba Cortina je trdila, da protidampinške dajatve, če bi se ponovno uvedla, ne bi bilo več mogoče pobirati, saj je zastaralni rok iz člena 221(3) carinskega zakonika Skupnosti (zdaj člena 103(1) carinskega zakonika Unije) potekel.
The allegation is therefore so abstract that the institutions cannot take into account those difficulties when carrying out the assessment of the MET/IT claims.
Po mnenju družbe Cortina bi to stanje pomenilo zlorabo pooblastil s strani Komisije.
As that argument is based on speculation and not supported by precise indications as to which documents and which people are no longer available and as to what the relevance of those documents and people for the assessment of the MET/IT claim is, that argument is rejected.
Komisija opozarja, da v skladu s členom 221(3) carinskega zakonika Skupnosti (členom 103(1) carinskega zakonika Unije) zastaralni rok ne velja, če je bila vložena pritožba v skladu s členom 243 carinskega zakonika Skupnosti (členom 44(2) carinskega zakonika Unije), kot je to v vseh obravnavanih zadevah, ki se nanašajo na pritožbe na podlagi člena 236 carinskega zakonika Skupnosti (člena 119 carinskega zakonika Unije).
Regarding the claim that an importer would have no means to provide any meaningful input, the Commission observes the following: first, importers do not enjoy rights of defence, as the anti-dumping measure is not directed against them, but against the exporting producers.
Pritožba v smislu člena 103(3) carinskega zakonika Unije v skladu s pojasnilom iz člena 44(2) iste uredbe zajema vse od prvotnega izpodbijanja odločitve nacionalnih carinskih organov, ki uvajajo dajatev, do končne sodbe nacionalnega sodišča, in po potrebi vključuje predlog za sprejetje predhodne odločbe.
Second, importers had the opportunity to comment on that point already during the administrative procedure prior to the adoption of the contested Regulation.
Triletno obdobje se zato začne z datumom vložitve pravnega sredstva.
Third, if importers thought that there was an irregularity in that regard, they had to take the necessary contractual arrangements with their suppliers to ensure to dispose of the necessary documentation.
Družba Cortina je trdila, da Komisija po prenehanju veljavnosti odstavka 15(a)(ii) protokola o pristopu Kitajske k STO 11. decembra 2016 ne more več uporabiti metodologije, ki se je uporabila za določitev normalne vrednosti za kitajske izvoznike v prvotni preiskavi (tj. metodologijo primerljive države na podlagi člena 2(7)(a) osnovne uredbe).
Therefore, the claim has to be rejected.
Ta trditev se zato zavrne.
Sixth, Cortina argued that the Commission failed to examine whether the imposition of the anti-dumping duties would be in the Union interest and argued that the measures would be against the Union interest because (i) the measures already had their intended effect when first imposed; (ii) the measures would not cause additional benefit for the Union industry; (iii) the measures would not affect the exporting producers; and (iv) the measures would impose an important cost on the importers in the Union.
Ta uredba je v skladu z mnenjem odbora, ustanovljenega s členom 15(1) Uredbe (EU) 2016/1036 –
The present case only concerns the MET/IT requests, because this is the only point on which a legal error has been identified by the Union Courts.
SPREJELA NASLEDNJO UREDBO:
For Union interest, the assessment in Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006 remains fully valid.
Člen 1
Furthermore, the present measure is justified in order to protect the financial interest of the Union.
Uvede se dokončna protidampinška dajatev na uvoz obutve z zgornjim delom iz usnja ali umetnega usnja, razen športne obutve, obutve s posebno tehnologijo, copat in druge hišne obutve ter obutve z zaščitno kapico, s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske in Vietnama, ki jo proizvajajo proizvajalci izvozniki iz Priloge II k tej uredbi in je uvrščena pod oznake KN: 64032000, ex64033000, ex64035111, ex64035115, ex64035119, ex64035191, ex64035195, ex64035199, ex64035911, ex64035931, ex64035935, ex64035939, ex64035991, ex64035995, ex64035999, ex64039111, ex64039113, ex64039116, ex64039118, ex64039191, ex64039193, ex64039196, ex64039198, ex64039911, ex64039931, ex64039933, ex64039936, ex64039938, ex64039991, ex64039993, ex64039996, ex64039998 in ex64051000, ki je potekal v obdobju uporabe Uredbe (ES) št. 1472/2006 in Izvedbene uredbe (EU) št. 1294/2009.
Seventh, Cortina claimed that the anti-dumping duty, if re-imposed, could no longer be collected because of the statute of limitations of Article 221(3) of the Community Customs Code (now Article 103(1) of the Union Customs Code) had expired.
Oznake TARIC so navedene v Prilogi I k tej uredbi.
According to Cortina, this situation would constitute an abuse of power by the Commission.
V tej uredbi se uporabljajo naslednje opredelitve pojmov:
The Commission recalls that according to Article 221(3) of the Community Customs Code/103(1) of the Union Customs Code, the statute of limitations does not apply where an appeal pursuant to Article 243 of the Community Customs Code/Article 44(2) of the Union Customs Code is lodged, as in all the present cases, which concern appeals on the basis of Article 236 of the Community Customs Code/Article 119 of the Union Customs Code.
„športna obutev“ pomeni obutev v smislu opombe 1 k tarifnim podštevilkam v poglavju 64 Priloge I k Uredbi Komisije (ES) št. 1719/2005,
An appeal within the meaning of Article 103(3) of the Union Customs Code, pursuant to the clarification in Article 44(2) of the same regulation, extends from the initial challenge to the decision by the national customs authorities imposing the duties up to the final judgment rendered by the national court, including, where necessary, a reference for a preliminary ruling.
„obutev s posebno tehnologijo“ pomeni obutev s ceno CIF za par v višini najmanj 7,5 EUR, ki je namenjena športnim aktivnostim, z eno- ali večplastno oblikovanim podplatom, nebrizganim, izdelanim iz sintetičnih materialov, posebej oblikovanim, da se odpravi učinek vertikalnih ali lateralnih gibov, ter s tehničnimi značilnostmi, kakor so hermetične podloge, ki vsebujejo plin ali tekočino, mehanske komponente, ki odpravljajo ali nevtralizirajo učinek udarca, ali materiali, kakor so polimeri z nizko gostoto, ter ki je uvrščena pod oznake KN ex64039111, ex64039113, ex64039116, ex64039118, ex64039191, ex64039193, ex64039196, ex64039198, ex64039991, ex64039993, ex64039996, ex64039998,
The three year period is consequently stayed from the date the challenge is filed.
„obutev z zaščitno kapico“ pomeni obutev, ki vsebuje zaščitno kapico z odpornostjo proti udarcem najmanj 100 joulov in je uvrščena pod oznake KN: ex64033000, ex64035111, ex64035115, ex64035119, ex64035191, ex64035195, ex64035199, ex64035911, ex64035931, ex64035935, ex64035939, ex64035991, ex64035995, ex64035999, ex64039111, ex64039113, ex64039116, ex64039118, ex64039191, ex64039193, ex64039196, ex64039198, ex64039911, ex64039931, ex64039933, ex64039936, ex64039938, ex64039991, ex64039993, ex64039996, ex64039998 in ex64051000,
Lastly, Cortina claimed that, following the expiry of paragraph 15(a)(ii) of China's WTO Protocol of Accession on 11 December 2016, the Commission can no longer rely on the methodology used to determine normal value for Chinese exporters in the original investigation (i.e. the analogue country methodology under Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation).
„copati in druga hišna obutev“ pomeni obutev, ki se uvršča pod oznako KN ex64051000.
The contested regulation was adopted in 2006.
Stopnja veljavne dokončne protidampinške dajatve pred plačilom dajatev za neto ceno franko meja Unije izdelkov iz odstavka 1, ki jih proizvajajo proizvajalci izvozniki iz Priloge II k tej uredbi, je 16,5 % za zadevne kitajske proizvajalce izvoznike in 10 % za zadevne vietnamske proizvajalce izvoznike.
The relevant legislation applicable to this proceeding is Regulation (EU) 2016/1036.
Člen 2
Therefore, this claim is rejected.
Zneski, zavarovani z začasno protidampinško dajatvijo v skladu z Uredbo (ES) št. 553/2006, se dokončno poberejo.
This Regulation is in accordance with the opinion of the Committee established by Article 15(1) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036,
Zavarovani zneski, ki presegajo dokončno stopnjo protidampinških dajatev, se sprostijo.
Article 1
Ocena položaja družb iz Priloge III k tej uredbi se začasno odloži, dokler uvoznik, ki od nacionalnih carinskih organov zahteva povračilo, Komisiji ne sporoči imen in naslovov proizvajalcev izvoznikov, od katerih so zadevni trgovci kupili obutev, ali, če v navedenem časovnem obdobju Komisija ne prejme odgovora, po preteku roka, ki ga Komisija določi za predložitev navedenih informacij.
A definitive anti-dumping duty is hereby imposed on imports of footwear with uppers of leather or composition leather, excluding sports footwear, footwear involving special technology, slippers and other indoor footwear and footwear with a protective toecap, originating in the People's Republic of China and Vietnam and produced by the exporting producers listed in Annex II to this Regulation and falling within CN codes: 64032000, ex64033000, ex64035111, ex64035115, ex64035119, ex64035191, ex64035195, ex64035199, ex64035911, ex64035931, ex64035935, ex64035939, ex64035991, ex64035995, ex64035999, ex64039111, ex64039113, ex64039116, ex64039118, ex64039191, ex64039193, ex64039196, ex64039198, ex64039911, ex64039931, ex64039933, ex64039936, ex64039938, ex64039991, ex64039993, ex64039996, ex64039998 and ex64051000 which took place during the period of application of Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006 and Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1294/2009.
Komisija navedeni rok, ki v nobenem primeru ni krajši od enega meseca, določi v dopisu, ki ga pošlje zadevnemu uvozniku.
The TARIC codes are listed in the Annex I to this Regulation.
Komisija prejete informacije preuči v osmih mesecih od datuma prejema.
For the purpose of this Regulation, the following definitions shall apply:
Nacionalnim carinskim organom se odredi, da ne povrnejo pobranih carinskih dajatev, dokler Komisija ne konča ocene navedenih zahtevkov.
‘sports footwear’ shall mean footwear within the meaning of subheading note 1 to Chapter 64 of Annex I of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1719/2005,
Člen 4
‘footwear involving special technology’ shall mean footwear having a CIF price per pair of not less than EUR 7,50, for use in sporting activities, with a single- or multi-layer moulded sole, not injected, manufactured from synthetic materials specially designed to absorb the impact of vertical or lateral movements and with technical features such as hermetic pads containing gas or fluid, mechanical components which absorb or neutralise impact, or materials such as low-density polymers and falling within CN codes ex64039111, ex64039113, ex64039116, ex64039118, ex64039191, ex64039193, ex64039196, ex64039198, ex64039991, ex64039993, ex64039996, ex64039998,
Ta uredba začne veljati dan po objavi v Uradnem listu Evropske unije.
‘footwear with a protective toecap’ shall mean footwear incorporating a protective toecap with an impact resistance of at least 100 joules and falling within CN codes: ex64033000, ex64035111, ex64035115, ex64035119, ex64035191, ex64035195, ex64035199, ex64035911, ex64035931, ex64035935, ex64035939, ex64035991, ex64035995, ex64035999, ex64039111, ex64039113, ex64039116, ex64039118, ex64039191, ex64039193, ex64039196, ex64039198, ex64039911, ex64039931, ex64039933, ex64039936, ex64039938, ex64039991, ex64039993, ex64039996, ex64039998 and ex64051000,
Ta uredba je v celoti zavezujoča in se neposredno uporablja v vseh državah članicah.
‘slippers and other indoor footwear’ shall mean such footwear falling within CN code ex64051000.
V Bruslju, 9. marca 2017
The rate of the definitive anti-dumping duty applicable, before duty, to the net free-at-Union-frontier price of the products described in paragraph 1 and manufactured by the exporting producers listed in Annex II to this Regulation shall be 16,5 % for the Chinese exporting producers concerned and 10 % for the Vietnamese exporting producers concerned.
Za Komisijo
The amounts secured by way of the provisional anti-dumping duty pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 553/2006 shall be definitively collected.
UL L 176, 30.6.2016, str. 21.
The amounts secured in excess of the definitive rate of anti-dumping duties shall be released.
Uredba Komisije (ES) št. 553/2006 z dne 23. marca 2006 o uvedbi začasne protidampinške dajatve na uvoz določene obutve z zgornjim delom iz usnja s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske in Vietnama (UL L 98, 6.4.2006, str. 3).
Article 3
Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 1472/2006 z dne 5. oktobra 2006 o uvedbi dokončne protidampinške dajatve in o dokončnem pobiranju začasne dajatve, uvedene na uvoz določene obutve z zgornjim delom iz usnja s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske in Vietnama (UL L 275, 6.10.2006, str. 1).
The assessment of the situation of companies listed in Annex III of this Regulation is temporarily suspended until the importer claiming reimbursement from national customs authorities has informed the Commission of the names and addresses of the exporting producers from which the relevant traders have purchased the footwear, or, where no reply is received within that period of time, the expiry of the deadline set by the Commission for providing that information.
Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 388/2008 z dne 29. aprila 2008 o razširitvi dokončnih protidampinških ukrepov, uvedenih z Uredbo (ES) št. 1472/2006 na uvoz določene obutve z zgornjim delom iz usnja s poreklom iz Ljudske republike Kitajske, na uvoz enakega izdelka, poslanega iz Posebne upravne regije Macao, ne glede na to, ali je deklariran kot izdelek s poreklom iz Posebne upravne regije Macao ali ne (UL L 117, 1.5.2008, str. 1).
That deadline shall be set out in a letter by the Commission to the relevant importer, and shall, in any case, not be shorter than one month.
UL C 251, 3.10.2008, str. 21.
The Commission shall examine the information received within eight months from the date of receipt.
Izvedbena Uredba Sveta (EU) št. 1294/2009 z dne 22. decembra 2009 o uvedbi dokončne protidampinške dajatve na uvoz določene obutve z zgornjim delom iz usnja s poreklom iz Vietnama in s poreklom iz Ljudske Republike Kitajske, kakor je bila razširjena na uvoz določene obutve z zgornjim delom iz usnja, poslane iz Posebne upravne regije Macao, ne glede na to, ali je deklarirana kot izdelek s poreklom iz Posebne upravne regije Macao ali ne, na osnovi pregleda zaradi izteka ukrepov na podlagi člena 11(2) Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 384/96 (UL L 352, 30.12.2009, str. 1).
National customs authorities are hereby directed not to reimburse customs duties collected until the Commission has finalised its assessment of those claims.
UL C 295, 11.10.2013, str. 6.
Article 4
Izvedbeni sklep Sveta 2014/149/EU z dne 18. marca 2014 o zavrnitvi predloga izvedbene uredbe 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.
This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Ltd in Zhejiang Aokang Shoes Co.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.
Ltd (UL L 82, 20.3.2014, str. 27).
Done at Brussels, 9 March 2017.
Uredba Sveta (EGS) št. 2913/92 z dne 12. oktobra 1992 o carinskem zakoniku Skupnosti (UL L 302, 19.10.1992, str. 1).
For the Commission
UL C 106, 21.3.2016, str. 2.
The President
Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 384/96 z dne 22. decembra 1995 o zaščiti proti dumpinškemu uvozu iz držav, ki niso članice Evropske skupnosti (UL L 56, 6.3.1996, str. 1).
OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 21.
Sodba Sodišča v združenih zadevah Asteris AE in drugi in Helenska republika proti Komisiji, 97, 193, 99 in 215/86, Recueil 1988, str. 2181, točki 27 in 28.
Council Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006 of 5 October 2006 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitely the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain footwear with uppers of leather originating in the People's Republic of China and Vietnam (OJ L 275, 6.10.2006, p. 1).
I-6993, točka 31, sodba v zadevi Industrie des Poudres Sphériques proti Svetu, C-458/98 P, Recueil 2000, str.
Council Regulation (EC) No 388/2008 of 29 April 2008 extending the definitive anti-dumping measures imposed by Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006 on imports of certain footwear with uppers of leather originating in the People's Republic of China to imports of the same product consigned from the Macao SAR, whether declared as originating in the Macao SAR or not (OJ L 117, 1.5.2008, p. 1).
I-8147, točke od 80 do 85, sodba v zadevi Alitalia proti Komisiji, T-301/01, ZOdl.
OJ C 251, 3.10.2008, p. 21.
2008, str.
Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1294/2009 of 22 December 2009 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain footwear with uppers of leather originating in Vietnam and originating in the People's Republic of China, as extended to imports of certain footwear with uppers of leather consigned from the Macao SAR, whether declared as originating in the Macao SAR or not, following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (OJ L 352, 30.12.2009, p. 1).
II-1753, točki 99 in 142, sodba v združenih zadevah Région Nord-Pas de Calais proti Komisiji, T-267/08 in T-279/08, ZOdl.
OJ C 295, 11.10.2013, p. 6.
2011, str.
Council Implementing Decision 2014/149/EU of 18 March 2014 rejecting the proposal for an Implementing Regulation reimposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitely the provisional duty imposed of 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.
II-1999, točka 83.
Ltd and Zhejiang Aokang Shoes Co.
Sodba v zadevi Španija proti Komisiji, C-415/96, Recueil 1998, str.
Ltd (OJ L 82, 20.3.2014, p. 27).
I-6993, točka 31, sodba v zadevi Industrie des Poudres Sphériques proti Svetu, C-458/98 P, Recueil 2000, str.
Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ L 302, 19.10.1992, p.
I-8147, točke od 80 do 85.
1).
Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 1225/2009 o zaščiti proti dumpinškemu uvozu iz držav, ki niso članice Evropske skupnosti (UL L 343, 22.12.2009, str. 51).
OJ C 106, 21.3.2016, p. 2.
Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 1225/2009 je bila naknadno spremenjena z Uredbo (EU) št. 765/2012 Evropskega parlamenta in Sveta z dne 13. junija 2012 o spremembi Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1225/2009 o zaščiti proti dampinškemu uvozu iz držav, ki niso članice Evropske skupnosti (UL L 237, 3.9.2012, str. 1).
Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1).
V skladu s členom 2 Uredbe (EU) št. 765/2012 se spremembe, uvedene z uredbo o spremembi, uporabljajo samo za preiskave, ki so se začele po začetku veljavnosti navedene uredbe.
Joined Cases 97, 193, 99 and 215/86 Asteris AE and others and Hellenic Republic v Commission [1988] ECR 2181, paragraphs 27 and 28.
Ta preiskava pa se je začela 7. julija 2005 (UL C 166, 7.7.2005, str. 14).
Case C-415/96 Spain v Commission [1998] ECR I-6993, paragraph 31; Case C-458/98 P Industrie des Poudres Sphériques v Council [2000] I-8147, paragraphs 80 to 85; Case T-301/01 Alitalia v Commission [2008] II-1753, paragraphs 99 and 142; Joined Cases T-267/08 and T-279/08 Région Nord-Pas de Calais v Commission [2011] II-1999, paragraph 83.
Izvedbena uredba Komisije (EU) 2016/1395 z dne 18. avgusta 2016 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 družbe Buckinghan Shoe Mfg Co.
Case C-415/96 Spain v Commission [1998] ECR I-6993, paragraph 31; Case C-458/98 P Industrie des Poudres Sphériques v Council [2000] I-8147, paragraphs 80 to 85.
Ltd, Buildyet Shoes Mfg., DongGuan Elegant Top Shoes Co.
Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 51).
Ltd, Dongguan Stella Footwear Co.
Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 was subsequently amended by Regulation (EU) No 765/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2012 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (OJ L 237, 3.9.2012, p. 1).
Ltd, Dongguan Taiway Sports Goods Limited, Foshan City Nanhai Qun Rui Footwear Co., Jianle Footwear Industrial, Sihui Kingo Rubber Shoes Factory, Synfort Shoes Co.
According to Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 765/2012, the amendments introduced by that amending Regulation only apply to investigations initiated after the entry into force of that Regulation.
Ltd, Taicang Kotoni Shoes Co.
The present investigation, however, was initiated on 7 July 2005 (OJ C 166, 7.7.2005, p. 14).
Ltd, Wei Hao Shoe Co.