# C_2014303EN.01004301.xml

| 8.9.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 303/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.9.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 303/43

---

Action brought on 18 June 2014 — AETMD v Council

(Case T-460/14)

2014/C 303/51

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Association européenne des transformateurs de maïs doux (AETMD) (Paris, France) (represented by: A. Willems, S. De Knop and J. Charles, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 307/2014 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) No 875/2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain prepared or preserved sweetcorn in kernels originating in Thailand following an interim review pursuant of Article 11(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 307/2014 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) No 875/2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain prepared or preserved sweetcorn in kernels originating in Thailand following an interim review pursuant of Article 11(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009;

| — | order the Council to correct Implementing Regulation (EU) No 875/2013 in view of the annulment of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 307/2004; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to correct Implementing Regulation (EU) No 875/2013 in view of the annulment of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 307/2004;

| — | order the Council to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging that the institutions committed a manifest error of assessment and infringed Article 2(3) and (4) of Council Regulation No 1225/2009 (1) by failing to properly assess whether River Kwai International Food Industry’s domestic sales were made in the ordinary course of trade and whether the domestic sales should therefore serve as a basis to calculate River Kwai International Food Industry’s normal value. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the institutions committed a manifest error of assessment and infringed Article 2(3) and (4) of Council Regulation No 1225/2009 (1) by failing to properly assess whether River Kwai International Food Industry’s domestic sales were made in the ordinary course of trade and whether the domestic sales should therefore serve as a basis to calculate River Kwai International Food Industry’s normal value.

1

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that the institutions infringed Article 2(10) of Council Regulation No 1225/2009 by failing to make a fair comparison between River Kwai International Food Industry’s export price and normal value. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the institutions infringed Article 2(10) of Council Regulation No 1225/2009 by failing to make a fair comparison between River Kwai International Food Industry’s export price and normal value.

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging that the institutions infringed Article 11(3) of Council Regulation No 1225/2009 by failing to properly assess the alleged change in River Kwai International Food Industry’s dumping margin and by failing to properly assess the lasting nature of any such alleged change. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging that the institutions infringed Article 11(3) of Council Regulation No 1225/2009 by failing to properly assess the alleged change in River Kwai International Food Industry’s dumping margin and by failing to properly assess the lasting nature of any such alleged change.

| 4. | Fourth plea in law, alleging that the institutions infringed Article 19(2) and Article 20(2) of Council Regulation No 1225/2009 by failing to provide the applicant with a meaningful summary of the evidence on which they intended to amend River Kwai International Food Industry’s dumping margin and by failing to provide the applicant with the considerations on the basis of which they intended to amend River Kwai International Food Industry’s anti-dumping duty. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Fourth plea in law, alleging that the institutions infringed Article 19(2) and Article 20(2) of Council Regulation No 1225/2009 by failing to provide the applicant with a meaningful summary of the evidence on which they intended to amend River Kwai International Food Industry’s dumping margin and by failing to provide the applicant with the considerations on the basis of which they intended to amend River Kwai International Food Industry’s anti-dumping duty.

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 of 30 November 2009 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (OJ 2009 L 343, p. 51).

1

---