Order — ECLI:EU:T:2013:4
Date: 2013-01-11
Language of the case: French
Court formation: Fourth Chamber
Subject matter: Dumping;External relations;Commercial policy
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded;Action for damages - unfounded;Action for annulment - inadmissible;Action for damages - inadmissible
Origin: France

summary of the pleas in law on which the application is based — Plea not supported by precise arguments — Inadmissible (Statute of the Court of Justice, Arts 21, first para., and 53, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 44(1)(c)) (see paras 57-59) 6. Common commercial policy — Protection against dumping — Imposition of anti-dumping duties — No transitional provisions applicable to imports carried out pursuant to earlier contracts — Principle of the protection of legitimate expectations — Infringement — None (see paras 61-67) 7. Non-contractual liability — Conditions — Unlawfulness — Injury — Causal link — One of the conditions not satisfied — Claim for compensation dismissed in its entirety (Art. 340 TFEU) (see para. 70) Re: In Case T‑445/11, principally, annulment of Commission Regulation (EU) No 627/2011 of 27 June 2011 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes of stainless steel originating in the People’s Republic of China (OJ 2011 L 169, p. 1) and, in the alternative, an application for damages for the damage allegedly suffered by the applicant following the immediate entry into force of the contested regulation and, in Case T‑88/12, principally, annulment of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1331/2011 of 14 December 2011 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes of stainless steel originating in the People’s Republic of China (OJ 2011 L 336, p. 6) and, in the alternative, a claim for compensation for damage allegedly suffered by the applicants in consequence of the definitive collection of the provisional duty ordered in that regulation. Operative part 1. Cases T‑445/11 and T‑88/12 are joined for the purposes of the order. 2. The objections of inadmissibility raised in Cases T‑445/11 and T‑88/12 are joined to the main actions. 3. There is no further need to adjudicate in Case T‑445/11. 4. The action in Case T‑88/12 is dismissed as, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part manifestly devoid of any basis in law. 5. Charron Inox and Almet are ordered to pay all the costs in Case T‑445/11. 6. Charron Inox and Almet are ordered to pay the costs incurred by the Council of the European Union in Case T‑88/12 and to bear their own costs in connection therewith. 7. The European Commission is ordered to bear its own costs in Case T‑88/12.