Skip to content

GlobalLawDBby GenieAI

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Search the text of the law

Log in Get an API key

Laws Search Sanctions Map Data Developers

Log in Get an API key

The Global Law Database. Free to read, built for people and AI agents.

Explore

All laws
Search the text
Sanctions
Map of connections
Compare UK and EU

Developers

AI agents (MCP)
REST API
Bulk data
API keys

Coverage

United Kingdom
European Union
United States
Canada
Australia
France
Germany
Netherlands
Spain
Austria
Norway
Finland
Switzerland
Ireland

GlobalLawDB is made by GenieAI, London. It is not legal advice: check the official text before relying on it. Text comes from official publishers under their licences, listed on the Data page.

ThemeMatch my systemLightDark

European Union
Fliesen-Zentrum Deutschland GmbH v Hauptzollamt Regensburg (C-687/13)
Judgment
The question referred for a preliminar…
The obligation to state reasons and th…
78

Fliesen-Zentrum Deutschland GmbH v Hauptzollamt Regensburg (C-687/13)

Judgment of 10 Sept 2015law://eu/cjeu/2013/c-687-13/para_78@2026-11-10

78It follows that, if the essential objective pursued by the institution is apparent from the measure of general application at issue, that measure does not need to include specific reasoning for each of the adjustments to the normal value of the product at issue.

Source: EUR-Lex, © European Union, 1998-2026. Reuse authorised under Decision 2011/833/EU.

Key facts

Court: Court of Justice · Third Chamber
Case: C-687/13 · ECLI:EU:C:2015:573
Decided: 10 Sept 2015
Procedure: Preliminary reference · referred by the Finanzgericht München (Germany)
Upheld as valid: Regulation 2011/917
Applicant: Fliesen-Zentrum Deutschland GmbH
Defendant: Hauptzollamt Regensburg
Rapporteur: A. Ó Caoimh
Advocate General: E. Sharpston
Bench: 5 judges
M. Ilešič, A. Ó Caoimh, C. Toader, E. Jarašiūnas, C.G. Fernlund
Language: German
Official: CURIA · EUR-Lex 62013CJ0687

Topics

History · 1 version

10 Sept 2015Reading

Connections

Interprets 1: Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 917/2011 of 12 September 2011 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of ceramic tiles originating in the People’s Republic of China
Cited by 20: T.KUP SAS v Belgische Staat (C-349/16); Hitit Seramik Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ v European Commission (T-230/23); Zheshartsky LPK OOO (ZHLPK) v European Commission (T-3/22); Inner Mongolia Shuangxin Environment-Friendly Material Co. Ltd v European Commission (T-763/20); Guangdong Haomei New Materials Co. Ltd and Guangdong King Metal Light Alloy Technology Co. Ltd v European Commission (T-326/21)2 provisions; Hangzhou Dingsheng Industrial Group Co., Ltd and Others v European Commission (T-748/21); Republic of Austria v European Commission (T-101/18); AO Nevinnomysskiy Azot and AO Novomoskovskaya Aktsionernaya Kompania NAK "Azot" v European Commission (T-865/19); European Commission v Hubei Xinyegang Special Tube Co. Ltd (C-891/19 P)3 provisions; Roland SE v European Commission (T-132/18); China Chamber of Commerce for Import and Export of Machinery and Electronic Products and Others v European Commission (T-254/18); Changmao Biochemical Engineering Co. Ltd v European Commission (T-541/18); Zhejiang Jiuli Hi-Tech Metals Co. Ltd v European Commission (T-307/18); Donex Shipping and Forwarding BV v Staatssecretaris van Financiën (C-104/19); Jinan Meide Casting Co. Ltd v European Commission (T-650/17); Zhejiang Jndia Pipeline Industry Co. Ltd v European Commission (T-228/17); Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission (C-436/18 P)2 provisions; Changmao Biochemical Engineering Co. Ltd v European Commission (T-741/16); Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission (T-675/15); Caviro Distillerie Srl and Others v European Commission (T-211/16)2 provisions
Cites 15: Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (consolidated 2016)2 provisions; MSD Sharp & Dohme GmbH v Merckle GmbH (C-316/09); Hoesch Metals and Alloys GmbH v Hauptzollamt Aachen (C-373/08); Grünwald Logistik Service GmbH (GLS) v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Stadt (C-338/10); Kundan Industries Ltd and Tata International Ltd v Council of the European Union (T-88/98); Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (Codified version); Roland Abrias and Others v European Commission (C-3/83); Rotexchemie International Handels GmbH & Co. v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Waltershof (C-26/96); Italian Republic v Commission of the European Communities (C-138/03, C-324/03, C-431/03); Detlef Nölle, trading as "Eugen Nölle" v Hauptzollamt Bremen-Freihafen (C-16/90); Kingdom of Spain v Council of the European Union (C-342/03); W. Beus GmbH & Co. v Hauptzollamt München (C-5/67); Commission Regulation (EU) No 258/2011 of 16 March 2011 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of ceramic tiles originating in the People’s Republic of China; Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 917/2011 of 12 September 2011 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of ceramic tiles originating in the People’s Republic of China; Simon, Evers & Co. GmbH v Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Hafen (C-21/13)