# C_2006131EN.01004701.xml

| 3.6.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 131/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.6.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 131/47

---

Action brought on 10 April 2006 — Fjord Seafood Norway and Others v Council

(Case T-113/06)

(2006/C 131/87)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Fjord Seafood Norway AS (Oslo, Norway), Fjord Seafood Scotland Farming Ltd (Isle of Lewis, United Kingdom), Alsaker Fjordbruk AS (Onarheim, Norway) (represented by: J. Juuhl-Langseth and P. Dyrberg, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | Annul Council Regulation 85/2006 insofar as it relates to Fjord Seafood Norway AS. |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul Council Regulation 85/2006 insofar as it relates to Fjord Seafood Norway AS.

| — | Order the Council to bear the applicant's costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Council to bear the applicant's costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicants either export farmed salmon from Norway to the Community or produce it in the Community. The contested regulation imposes anti-dumping duties on farmed salmon originating in Norway.

In support of their application, the applicants submit in the first place that the contested regulation defines and applies the notion of Community industry wrongly. The applicants state that the contested regulation defined the Community industry suffering injury in a way that it covered less than 5 % of total Community production, in particular on the grounds that other Community producers are owned by or related to Norwegian interests. They submit that therefore the contested regulation violated the EEA Agreement, in particular the principle of freedom of establishment, free movement of capital and non-discrimination on grounds of nationality, the basic regulation (1), and Article 253.

1

The applicants furthermore contest that the contested regulation defined the Community industry as such as to cover only producers of farmed salmon. They submit that the processing industry should also have been included in the definition in as much as the salmon at issue is also processed and the duties imposed take into account processing costs.

The applicants also submit that the contested regulation wrongly assessed the dumping and injury based on data relating to the 25 Member States of the EU although for most of the time of the investigation period, the EU consisted of 15 Member States. Norwegian exporters market behaviour on the markets of the ten new Member States, who have no farmed salmon industry, prior to 1 May 2004 should not be construed as dumping causing injury to the Community industry.

The applicants furthermore submit that the samples of complainants and Norwegian exporters used are not representative, that the contested regulation failed to establish the causal link between Norwegian imports and injury and failed to consider whether injury by US and Canadian imports was not attributed to Norwegian imports. It is also submitted that the contested regulation was wrong in automatically identifying lost Community industry market share as injury, that the exchange rates used for the calculation of duties were wrong, that the basis for import prices on fillets is wrong and that the disclosure in that respect was insufficient. Finally, it is submitted that, in relation to the applicant Fjord Seafood Norway, the cost of production was wrongly established.

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (OJ L 56, p. 1)

1

---