EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62011CA0595

Case C-595/11: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 18 April 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — Steinel Vertrieb GmbH v Hauptzollamt Bielefeld (Commercial policy — Regulation (EC) No 1470/2001 — Regulation (EC) No 1205/2007 — Common Customs Tariff — Tariff classification — Combined Nomenclature — Definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of fluorescent compact lamps — Applicability of definitive anti-dumping duties to products classed in the tariff subheading referred to in the anti-dumping regulation — Product concerned — Scope)

SL C 164, 8.6.2013, p. 6–6 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

8.6.2013   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 164/6


Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 18 April 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf — Germany) — Steinel Vertrieb GmbH v Hauptzollamt Bielefeld

(Case C-595/11) (1)

(Commercial policy - Regulation (EC) No 1470/2001 - Regulation (EC) No 1205/2007 - Common Customs Tariff - Tariff classification - Combined Nomenclature - Definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of fluorescent compact lamps - Applicability of definitive anti-dumping duties to products classed in the tariff subheading referred to in the anti-dumping regulation - Product concerned - Scope)

2013/C 164/09

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Finanzgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Steinel Vertrieb GmbH

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Bielefeld

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Finanzgericht Düsseldorf — Interpretation of Council Regulation (EC) No 1470/2001 of 16 July 2001 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of integrated electronic compact fluorescent lamps (CFL-i) originating in the People’s Republic of China (OJ 2001 L 195, p. 8), as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1322/2006 of 1 September 2006 (OJ 2006 L 244, p. 1), and of Council Regulation (EC) No 1205/2007 of 15 October 2007 imposing anti-dumping duties on imports of integrated electronic compact fluorescent lamps (CFL-i) originating in the People’s Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 and extending to imports of the same product consigned from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the Republic of the Philippines (OJ 2007 L 272, p. 1) — Applicability of those regulations to compact fluorescent lamps with a twilight switch

Operative part of the judgment

Council Regulation (EC) No 1470/2001 of 16 July 2001 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of integrated electronic compact fluorescent lamps (CFL-i) originating in the People’s Republic of China, and Council Regulation (EC) No 1205/2007 of 15 October 2007 imposing anti-dumping duties on imports of integrated electronic compact fluorescent lamps (CFL-i) originating in the People’s Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 and extending to imports of the same product consigned from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and the Republic of the Philippines, cover all products bearing the same essential characteristics as those referred to in Article 1 of those regulations and which also fall within heading ex 8539 31 90 of the combined nomenclature set out in Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ 1987 L 256, p. 1), as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 254/2000 of 31 January 2000. It is for the national court to assess whether that is the case for the products at issue in spite of the addition of a twilight switch, or whether the products at issue constitute different products on the ground that they bear additional characteristics which are not referred to in those regulations.


(1)  OJ C 89, 24.3.2012.


Top