# C_2011055EN.01003002.xml

| 19.2.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 55/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.2.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 55/30

---

Action brought on 23 December 2010 — Acron and Dorogobuzh v Council

(Case T-582/10)

2011/C 55/55

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Acron OAO (Veliky Novgorod, Russian Federation) and Dorogobuzh OAO (Verkhnedneprovsky Settlement, Russian Federation), (represented by: B. Evtimov, lawyer)

Applicants:

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 856/2010 of 27 September 2010 (1), insofar as it affects the applicants; and |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 856/2010 of 27 September 2010 (1), insofar as it affects the applicants; and

1

| — | Order the Council to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Council to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

By means of its application, the applicants seek, pursuant to Article 263 TFUE, the annulment of Council Regulation (EU) 856/2010, which terminated a partial interim review initiated pursuant to the request of the applicants for a change in the form of anti-dumping measure by including a related trader in their undertaking in force.

In support of their submissions, the applicants put forward the following pleas in law:

| | The applicants submit that the Union institutions used a legally flawed basis to reject their request and terminate the partial interim review without a change of measure. |
| --- | --- |

The applicants submit that the Union institutions used a legally flawed basis to reject their request and terminate the partial interim review without a change of measure.

| | More specifically, the applicants claim that the Union institutions breached Article 143(1)(a) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1993 L 253, p. 1) and made a manifest errors of assessment in finding that their related trader was related to another company. |
| --- | --- |

More specifically, the applicants claim that the Union institutions breached Article 143(1)(a) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (OJ 1993 L 253, p. 1) and made a manifest errors of assessment in finding that their related trader was related to another company.

| | Furthermore, the applicants submit that in the conduct of their investigation and findings in Council Regulation (EU) 856/2010 the institutions breached Article 5(4) TEU requiring the respect by the Union institutions of the fundamental EU law principle of proportionality, and of Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights embodying the principle of good administration. |
| --- | --- |

Furthermore, the applicants submit that in the conduct of their investigation and findings in Council Regulation (EU) 856/2010 the institutions breached Article 5(4) TEU requiring the respect by the Union institutions of the fundamental EU law principle of proportionality, and of Article 41 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights embodying the principle of good administration.

---

(1)  Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 856/2010 of 27 September 2010 terminating the partial interim review of Regulation (EC) No 661/2008 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of ammonium nitrate originating in Russia (OJ 2010 L 254, p. 5)

1

---