#2126933
Direction générale du commerce/Directoraat-generaal Handel
Directorate-General for Trade
Scag na torthaí
Bailiúcháin
6 thoradh in 6 dhoiciméad
#2369948
Breithiúnas an 21 Meán Fómhair 1999, Brentjens’ Handelsonderneming BV v Stichting Bedrijfspensioenfonds voor de Handel in Bouwmaterialen, C-115/97, EU:C:1999:434, mír 57;
Judgment of 21 September 1999, Brentjens' Handelsonderneming BV v Stichting Bedrijfspensioenfonds voor de Handel in Bouwmaterialen, C-115/97, EU:C:1999:434, paragraph 57;
#2399128
(“TDK Hungary”), Euranimi, Valeo Group (“Valeo”), TitanX Holding (“TitanX”), Airoldi Metalli S.p.a. (“Airoldi”), SATMA agus Lodec Metall-Handel (“Lodec”).
(‘TDK Hungary’), Euranimi, Valeo Group (‘Valeo’), TitanX Holding (‘TitanX’), Airoldi Metalli S.p.a. (‘Airoldi’), SATMA and Lodec Metall-Handel (‘Lodec’).
#2013848
D’áitigh páirtí leasmhar eile, Nilo Asia PTE Ltd/Lodec Metall-Handel Niederlassung Bremen der O. Wilms GMBH (“Nilo”), nach raibh na cóid AC a úsáidtear le haghaidh na ríomhanna sladghearrtha agus ganndíola in ann plátaí agus leatháin choiteanna a shainaithint agus go bhféadfadh míchruinneas teacht astu.
Another interested party, Nilo Asia PTE Ltd/Lodec Metall-Handel Niederlassung Bremen der O. Wilms GMBH (‘Nilo’), argued that the CN codes used for the undercutting and underselling calculations did not allow for the identification of the plates and common sheets and could lead to inaccuracies.
#2135325
Maidir leis seo, mheas sé go raibh an chuideachta Nilo Asia PTE Ltd/Lodec Metall-Handel Niederlassung Bremen der O. Wilms GMBH (“Nilo”), gur rud é go raibh sé ina thrádálaí i bhfírinne in ainneoin gur chuir é féin i láthair mar allmhaireoir neamhghaolmhar.
In this regard, it considered that the company Nilo Asia PTE Ltd/Lodec Metall-Handel Niederlassung Bremen der O. Wilms GMBH (‘Nilo’), that had presented itself as an unrelated importer was actually a trader.
#2408523
Breithiúnas na Cúirte Breithiúnais an 21 Iúil 2011, Alcoa Trasformazioni v an Coimisiún, C-194/09 P, ECLI:EU:C:2011:497, mír 71 agus an cásdlí atá luaite ann; breithiúnas na Cúirte Ginearálta an 30 Meitheamh 2005, Branco v an Coimisiún, T-347/03, ECLI:EU:T:2005:265, mír 102 agus an cásdlí a luaitear ann; breithiúnas na Cúirte Ginearálta an 23 Feabhra 2006, Cementbouw Handel & Industrie v an Coimisiún, T-282/02, ECLI:EU:T:2006:64,, mír 77; cinneadh ón gCúirt Ghinearálta an 30 Meitheamh 2009, CPEM v an Coimisiún, T-444/07, ECLI:EU:T:2009:227, mír 126.
Judgment of the Court of Justice of 21 July 2011, Alcoa Trasformazioni v Commission, C-194/09 P, ECLI:EU:C:2011:497, paragraph 71 and the case-law cited therein; judgment of the General Court of 30 June 2005, Branco v Commission, T-347/03, ECLI:EU:T:2005:265, paragraph 102 and the case-law cited therein; judgment of the General Court of 23 February 2006, Cementbouw Handel & Industrie v Commission, T-282/02, ECLI:EU:T:2006:64, paragraph 77; judgment of the General Court of 30 June 2009, CPEM v Commission, T-444/07, ECLI:EU:T:2009:227, paragraph 126.