WIREDGOV

On 5 October 2006, the Council of the EU adopted a regulation1 imposing an anti-dumping duty on certain leather footwear imported from China and Vietnam into the EU. The rate of the antidumping duty was set at 16.5% for footwear manufactured by companies established in China (with the exception of the company Golden Step, whose anti-dumping duty was set at 9.7%) and at 10% for footwear manufactured by companies established in Vietnam.

In 2010 and 2012, C & J Clark International Ltd (‘Clarks’), a UK manufacturer and retailer of footwear, requested from the Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs repayment of the anti-dumping duty that it had paid on account of importation of footwear into the EU over the period from 1 July 2007 until 31 August 2010. The sum concerned amounted to approximately €60 million. Clarks stated by way of justification for its claim that the regulation imposing the antidumping duty was invalid. After its claim was rejected, it brought an appeal before the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber).

In 2011 and 2012, Puma, a German sports goods company, requested from the Principal Customs Office, Nuremberg (Germany) repayment of the anti-dumping duty in respect of importation of the same goods, again on the basis that the regulation was invalid. The sum concerned amounted to approximately €5.1 million. When its request was rejected, Puma brought an action before the Finanzgericht München (Finance Court, Munich).

Both national courts had doubts as to the regulation’s validity and therefore decided to seek a ruling from the Court of Justice.

In today’s judgment, the Court holds that the regulation imposing an anti-dumping duty on imports of certain footwear originating in China and Vietnam is partially invalid.

Click here for full press release