5 Chinese Shoe Companies Litigation Claims Rejected By The European Court Of Justice

In March 17th, the Legal Daily reporter learned from the anti dumping lawyers' office responsible for the European Union's leather shoes: the European Court of justice rejected the claim of AOKANG, Tamar, Jin Lu, Hong Kong New Zealand dollar and WAN Bang China five shoe companies and sued the EU Trade Commission's lawsuit request to support the European Commission's anti-dumping duties on footwear products from China.

The attorney general's lawyer Pu Ling Chen believes that the EU court's interpretation of the anti-dumping provisions is based on the verification of the Chinese shoe companies from the EU in January last year to AOKANG.

The EU Trade Commission violated the principle of fair trade in anti-dumping investigations and ignored the evidence submitted by Chinese shoe companies.

The European Court of justice has made unfair decisions.

Pu Ling dust pointed out that in December last year, the EU announced the decision on the sunset review of Chinese leather shoes, the most important basis is the EU's on-site verification, so the outcome of the two ruling of the European Court and the European Commission is the same basis.

It is very unfair to Chinese shoe enterprises.

In July 2005, the European Union launched anti-dumping investigations involving Chinese leather shoes worth up to US $700 million.

In October 7, 2006, the EU Trade Commission concluded that the dumping rate of Chinese shoes was 16.5%, and a two-year anti-dumping duty was levied.

Five Chinese shoe companies such as AOKANG filed a lawsuit against the European Court of first instance, requesting the cancellation of the anti-dumping duty, on the grounds that the EU Trade Commission's cost analysis of Chinese enterprises exporting footwear products to the EU is not accurate.

In October 2008, the EU launched a final review on the expiration of anti-dumping measures against leather shoes in China.

In December 22, 2009, the EU Trade Commission announced the final review ruling, which will extend the anti-dumping measures for another 15 months.

"Now, the EU lawyers we are engaged in are analyzing the evidence based on the decisions of the European Court of justice, and we will take the next step according to the results of analysis and assessment, or appeal to the high court of the European Union."

Pu Lingchen said.

"We were unfairly treated by the European Trade Commission, and we did not get enough power to defend the anti-dumping allegations. The European Trade Commission did not make any proper analysis before making the decision."

Wang Zhentao, chairman of the AOKANG shoe Limited by Share Ltd of Zhejiang, told reporters that on the one hand, if possible, we would continue to appeal to the high court of the European Union and continue to strive for a fair and just ruling of the law. On the other hand, we expect the Chinese government to solve the EU anti-dumping problem as soon as possible through the trade dispute settlement mechanism.

It is understood that in February 4th of this year, the permanent mission of China to the World Trade Organization (WTO) has initiated the WTO dispute settlement mechanism under the EU anti-dumping request for Chinese leather shoes and formally launched the WTO dispute settlement procedure.

According to the relevant procedures, China and the EU will have about 60 days to negotiate the case.

If the consultation fails, China has the right to request the WTO to set up an expert group to investigate and decide the case.

Related links

Overseas experience of Chinese shoes

From August 2001 to January 2002, Chinese shoe traders were seized in Russia and lost about 300 million yuan.

In the winter of 2003, the footwear products of more than 20 Chinese shoe makers were burned in Rome, Italy.

In January 8, 2004, the Nigeria government issued a list of prohibited imports. Chinese shoes were among them.

In September 17, 2004, the "shoes burning event" occurred in Elche, a small city in eastern Spain.

In December 2004, the Italy Footwear Association (ANCI) appealed to the European Commission for anti-dumping investigations against all footwear products exported to the EU.

In February 1, 2005, the European Union formally implemented "advance import license monitoring" measures for footwear products from China.

In March 12, 2005, more than 20 Chinese shoe manufacturers were seized 89 container shoes in Russia, resulting in a total value of up to about 80000000 yuan loss.

In April 6, 2005, Mexico decided to carry out anti-dumping investigations on leather and similar products imported from China. In from April 15th to 16th of the same year, at the second world footwear conference, the European Union issued a signal on the restriction of Chinese shoes again.

In June 12, 2005, the European Commission decided to carry out anti-dumping investigations on footwear from China.

In July 7, 2005, the European Union issued a notice on its official website to investigate anti-dumping investigations on some leather shoes originating in China and Vietnam.

The EU has imposed anti-dumping duties on leather shoes and children's shoes made in China since October 2006, with a duty rate of 16.5%.

In December 31, 2008, the relevant departments of Brazil issued a notice and decided to start anti-dumping investigations on China's shoe imports.

According to customs statistics, Quanzhou shoes involved in the amount of $3 million 920 thousand, involving 28 enterprises.

In 2008, there were 13 new anti-dumping investigations initiated by 7 countries (regions) in Quanzhou, 2 against countervailing investigations, and 4 new cases of anti-dumping cases before 2008.

The amount involved is about 60 million dollars, involving 142 enterprises.

In early 2009, following the anti-dumping investigations by the European Union and Brazil on the FA FA footwear industry, Fujian encountered a series of anti-dumping investigations filed by Argentina and Canada.

In December 22, 2009, the EU member state's environment minister decided by a simple majority to continue to impose anti-dumping duties on leather shoes produced by China and Vietnam for 15 months.