Access to European Union law
<a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/content/help/eurlex-content/experimental-features.html" target="_blank">More about the experimental features corner</a>
Choose the experimental features you want to try
EUR-Lex
Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

You are here
Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search

Document 62017CN0592

Case C-592/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Vestre Landsret (Denmark) lodged on 12 October 2017 — Skatteministeriet v Baby Dan A/S

OJ C 424, 11.12.2017, p. 25–26 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

11.12.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 424/25

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Vestre Landsret (Denmark) lodged on 12 October 2017 — Skatteministeriet v Baby Dan A/S

(Case C-592/17)

(2017/C 424/37)

Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Vestre Landsret

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Skatteministeriet

Defendant: Baby Dan A/S

Question referred

1.

Must spindles with the specific features as described be deemed to be part of the child safety gate?

—

If the first question is answered in the affirmative, so that the spindles are deemed to be part of the child safety gate, must the spindles then be classified under CN heading 9403 90 10 or CN heading 7326 and 4421?

—

If the first question is answered in the negative, so that the spindles are not deemed to be part of the child safety gate, must the spindles then be classified under CN heading 7318 15 90 or CN heading 7318 19 00?

2.

If spindles with the specific features as described must be classified under CN heading 7318 15 90, the EU Court of Justice is requested to provide a preliminary ruling on the following question:

—

Is Council Regulation (EC) No 91/2009 of 26 January 2009 (1) imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain iron or steel fasteners originating in the People’s Republic of China invalid as a result of the fact that the Commission and the Council — according to the WTO’s Appellate Body — based themselves on a process that linked the definition of EU industry to EU producers’ willingness to be part of a sample and be inspected, resulting in a self-selecting process in the industry, which gave rise to a material risk of distortion of the investigation and the result?

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 91/2009 of 26 January 2009 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain iron or steel fasteners originating in the People’s Republic of China (OJ 2009 L 29, p. 1).

Top