Aokang Shoes Industry'S Anti-Dumping Appeal To The European High Court

Yesterday (27th), the reporter learned from Zhejiang Aokang Shoes Co., Ltd. that Aokang has formally appealed to the European Union High Court against the anti-dumping case of leather shoes heard by the court of first instance. The move marks that the legal proceedings between Chinese shoe companies and the EU have reached the final stage.

In response to the EU's unfair anti-dumping verdict on Chinese leather shoes, Aokang and other five Chinese shoe companies filed a judicial review with the EU Court of First Instance in December 2006. After nearly four years of litigation, the result finally came in March 2010: the European Court of First Instance rejected the claims of five Chinese shoe companies.

"After reading the judgment of the EU Court of First Instance, we found that the judgment was unfair." Pu Lingchen, the Chinese lawyer representing the shoe case, told reporters that in terms of calculating the extent of damage, the practices of the European Commission actually violated Article 1 of the EU anti-dumping regulations; When reviewing the change of measures and calculation methods of the European Commission, the time given by the European Commission to Chinese enterprises for review was unreasonable (5 days), and did not meet the 10 day time limit specified by the regulations; In interpreting Article 17, paragraph 3, and Article 9, paragraph 5 of the EU anti-dumping regulations, the Court of First Instance's interpretation is thought-provoking.

"The EU has imposed restrictions on Chinese leather shoes for nearly 15 years, and this unequal treatment should come to an end," Wang Zhentao, vice president of China Leather Association and chairman of Zhejiang Aokang Shoes Co., Ltd., told reporters yesterday.

The latest statistics from the China Leather Industry Association show that the previous anti-dumping duties have led to a 20% reduction in the output of leather shoes exported to Europe. About 40 million pairs of shoes were exported to the EU, which alone caused about 20000 workers in China to lose their jobs.

Just last month, at the request of the Chinese delegation, the World Trade Organization officially set up an expert group to investigate and decide whether the EU's anti-dumping measures against Chinese leather shoes violated international trade rules, thus opening the prelude to China's official and private efforts to safeguard export rights and interests.

WTO experts pointed out that the rules and nature of the existing dispute settlement mechanism of the World Trade Organization are more favorable to the plaintiff, especially some of the protection provisions for developing countries help to increase the winning rate of developing countries as plaintiffs. Data shows that since 1995, the average plaintiff victory rate of all WTO member countries under the dispute settlement mechanism is about 86%, and the overall victory rate of developing countries as plaintiffs is as high as 93%.

?