Official Journal of the European Union

C 209/25

Appeal brought on 18 May 2010 by Zhejiang Aokang Shoes Co., Ltd against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) delivered on 4 March 2010 in Case T-407/06: Zhejiang Aokang Shoes Co., Ltd v Council of the European Union

(Case C-247/10 P)


2010/C 209/35

Language of the case: English


Appellant: Zhejiang Aokang Shoes Co., Ltd (represented by: M. Sánchez Rydelski, Rechtsanwalt)

Other parties to the proceedings: Wenzhou Taima Shoes Co., Ltd, Council of the European Union, European Commission, Confédération européenne de l'industrie de la chaussure (CEC), BA.LA. di Lanciotti Vittorio & C. Sas, Calzaturificio Elisabet Srl, Calzaturificio Iacovelli di Iacovelli Giuseppe & C. Snc, Calzaturificio Leopamy Srl, Calzaturificio Lunella Srl, Calzaturificio Mia Shoe Snc di Gattafoni Carlo & C., Calzaturificio Primitempi di Monaldi Geri, Calzaturificio R. G. di Rossi & Galiè Srl, Calz. S. G. di Seghetta Giampiero e Sergio Snc, Carim Srl, Florens Shoes SpA, Gattafoni Shoe Snc di Gattafoni Giampaolo & C., Grif Srl, Missouri Srl, New Swing Srl, Podosan Medical Shoes di Cirilli Michela, Viviane Sas

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

Set aside the Judgment of the General Court of 4 March 2010 in Case T-407/06

Annul Council Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006 (1) imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain leather footwear from China and Vietnam in so far as it concerns the Appellant; and

Order the Council of the European Union to pay the Applicant's costs in this appeal and with regard to the procedure in Case T-407/06 in the General Court.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The appellant submits:


That the General Court erred in law, when it decided that the Commission could lawfully decide pursuant to Article 17(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (2) on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (‘Basic Regulation’), not to examine and make a determination on the Appellant's claims for market economy treatment (‘MET’) and individual treatment (‘IT’).


That the General Court erred in law concerning whether the Appellant's rights of defence were breached in connection with the established infringement of Article 20(5) of the Basic Regulation.

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1472/2006 of 5 October 2006 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitely the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain footwear with uppers of leather originating in the People's Republic of China and Vietnam

OJ L 275, p. 1

(2)  OJ L 56, p. 1