EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document C2006/074/34

Case T-364/03: Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 26 January 2006 — Medici Grimm v Council (Dumping — Imports of leather handbags originating in the People's Republic of China — Amendment of a regulation imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty — No retroactive effect — Annulment by the Court of First Instance — Action for damages — Sufficiently serious breach)

OB C 74, 25.3.2006, p. 17–17 (ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, NL, PL, PT, SK, SL, FI, SV)

25.3.2006   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 74/17


Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 26 January 2006 — Medici Grimm v Council

(Case T-364/03) (1)

(Dumping - Imports of leather handbags originating in the People's Republic of China - Amendment of a regulation imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty - No retroactive effect - Annulment by the Court of First Instance - Action for damages - Sufficiently serious breach)

(2006/C 74/34)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Medici Grimm KG (Rodgau Hainhausen, Germany) (represented by: R. MacLean, Solicitor, and E. Gybels, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bishop, Agent, assisted by G. Berrisch, lawyer)

Intervener in support of the defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: N. Khan and T. Scharf, Agents)

Application for

compensation under Article 235 EC and the second paragraph of Article 288 EC for damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of the absence of retroactive effect of Council Regulation (EC) No 2380/98 of 3 November 1998, amending Regulation (EC) No 1567/97 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of leather handbags originating in the People's Republic of China (OJ 1997 L 296, p. 1), partially annulled by the judgment in Case T-7/99 Medici Grimm v Council [2000] ECR II-2671

Operative part of the judgment

1.

The action is dismissed;

2.

The applicant shall bear, in addition to its own costs, the costs incurred by the Council;

3.

The Commission shall bear its own costs.


(1)  OJ C 21, 24.1.2004.


Top