Judgment — ECLI:EU:T:2017:127
Date: 2017-02-28
Language of the case: English
Court formation: Fifth Chamber
Subject matter: Dumping;External relations;Commercial policy
Procedure: Action for annulment - unfounded
Origin: Germany

Action brought on 28 February 2014 – JingAo Solar e.a. v Council (Case T-157/14) Language of the case: English Parties Applicants: JingAo Solar Co. Ltd (Ningjin, Chine); Shanghai JA Solar Technology Co. Ltd (Shanghai, Chine); Yangzhou JA Solar Technology Co. Ltd (Yangzhou, Chine); Hefei JA Solar Technology Co. Ltd (Hefei, Chine); Shanghai JA Solar PV Technology Co. Ltd (Shanghai); and JA Solar GmbH (Munich, Germany) (represented by: A. Willems, S. De Knop and J. Charles, lawyers) Defendants: Council of the European Union Form of order sought The applicants claim that the Court should: Declare the action admissible ; Annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1238/2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components (i.e. cells) originating in or consigned from the People’s Republic of China (OJ 2013 L 325, p. 1), as far as it applies to the applicants; Order the defendant to pay the costs. Pleas in law and main arguments In support of the action, the applicants rely on six pleas in law. First plea in law, alleging that by imposing anti-dumping measures on crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components consigned from the People’s Republic of China whereas the Notice of initiation mentioned only crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components originating in the People’s Republic of China, the Institutions violated Articles 5(10) and 5(11) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/20091 . Second plea in law, alleging that by imposing anti-dumping measures on crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and key components that were not subject to an anti-dumping investigation, the Institutions violated Articles 1 and 17 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009. Third plea in law, alleging that by applying a non-market economy methodology for calculating the dumping margin of products from market economy countries, the Institutions violated Article 2 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009. Fourth plea in law, alleging that by conducting one single investigation for two distinct products (i.e., crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules and cells), the Institutions violated Article 1(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009. Fifth plea in law, alleging that by failing to examine the applicants’ market economy treatment requests, the Institutions violated Article 2(7)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009; Sixth plea in law, alleging that by failing to separately quantify the injury suffered by the Union industry caused by both the dumped imports and other known factors and, as a consequence, by imposing a duty rate in excess of what is necessary to remove the injury caused by the dumped imports to the Union industry, the Institutions violated Articles 3 and 9(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009. ____________ ____________ 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)