61981CO0236_EN
Parties
Subject of the case
Grounds
Operative part
Parties
IN CASE 236/81
CELANESE CHEMICAL COMPANY INC ., WHOSE REGISTERED OFFICE IS IN DALLAS, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, REPRESENTED BY WILLY ALEXANDER AND CLEMENS EBBO MARIE VAN NISPEN TOT SEVENAER, ADVOCATES, OF THE HAGUE, WITH AN ADDRESS FOR SERVICE IN LUXEMBOURG AT THE CHAMBERS OF ERNEST ARENDT, CENTRE LOUVIGNY, 34 B RUE PHILIPPE-II,
APPLICANT,
V
COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, REPRESENTED BY ITS LEGAL ADVISER, GIJS PEETERS, ACTING AS AGENT,
AND
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, REPRESENTED BY ITS LEGAL ADVISER, PETER GILSDORF, ACTING AS AGENT,
THE AGENTS OF THE COUNCIL AND OF THE COMMISSION BEING ASSISTED BY JEREMY LEVER QC, OF GRAY ' S INN, AND ROBIN GRIFFITH, SOLICITOR, WITH AN ADDRESS FOR SERVICE IN LUXEMBOURG AT THE OFFICE OF H . J . PABBRUWE, EUROPEAN INVESTMENT BANK, 100 BOULEVARD KONRAD ADENAUER,
DEFENDANTS,
Subject of the case
APPLICATION FOR A DECLARATION THAT THE DECISION, CONTAINED IN COUNCIL REGULATION NO 1282/81 OF 12 MAY 1981, TO IMPOSE AN ANTI-DUMPING DUTY ON VINYL ACETATE MONOMER ORIGINATING IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND IMPORTED BY THE APPLICANT COMPANY IS VOID,
Grounds
9 THE REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT PUT FORWARD BY THE APPLICANT IS ACCEPTED . PROTECTION OF THE BUSINESS SECRETS OF THE UNDERTAKINGS UNDER INVESTIGATION IN ANTI-DUMPING PROCEEDINGS MUST TAKE ACCOUNT OF THE SPECIAL NATURE OF SUCH INVESTIGATIONS . THAT NEED HAS BEEN EXPRESSLY RECOGNIZED BY ARTICLE 8 OF COUNCIL REGULATION NO 3017/79 OF 20 DECEMBER 1979 ON PROTECTION AGAINST DUMPED OR SUBSIDIZED IMPORTS ( OFFICIAL JOURNAL L 339, P . 1 ). THAT PROVISION MUST BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT, WITH APPROPRIATE ADJUSTMENTS, IN PROCEEDINGS BROUGHT BEFORE THE COURT .
10 IN THIS CASE IT APPEARS EQUITABLE TO ENSURE CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT FOR THE DOCUMENTS AND PARTS OF DOCUMENTS FOR WHICH SUCH TREATMENT HAS BEEN CLAIMED BY THE APPLICANT AND ALREADY ACCEPTED BY THE DEFENDANT INSTITUTIONS .
11 AS REGARDS THE DOCUMENTS WHICH HAVE NOT YET BEEN THE SUBJECT OF AN EXAM-
INATION BY BOTH SIDES IT WILL BE FOR THE APPLICANT TO EXAMINE THEM WITH THE
DEFENDANT INSTITUTIONS AND TO REPORT TO THE COURT SO AS TO ENABLE IT TO ARRIVE AT A DECISION . IN THE EVENT OF CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT ' S NOT BEING ENSURED TO THE FULL EXTENT DESIRED BY THE APPLICANT THE LATTER MUST HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY IF IT DESIRES TO WITHDRAW ANY DOCUMENTS AND PARTS OF DOCUMENTS TO WHICH SUCH A REFUSAL RELATES .
12 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ARRANGEMENTS SET OUT ABOVE ALL THE MATERIAL WHOSE CONFIDENTIAL NATURE HAS BEEN RECOGNIZED BY THE COURT WILL BE PLACED IN A SPECIAL FILE, WHICH WILL ONLY BE DISCLOSED TO THE PRINCIPAL PARTIES AND THE OFFICERS OF THE COURT . THE ONUS WILL BE UPON THE APPLICANT TO TAKE ALL NECESSARY STEPS TO ENABLE THE COURT REGISTRY TO ASSEMBLE SUCH A FILE .
13 THE COURT HOWEVER RESERVES ITS DECISION AS REGARDS THE USE WHICH IT MAY NEED TO MAKE OF DOCUMENTS OF A CONFIDENTIAL NATURE IF RESPECT FOR THE CONFIDENTIAL NATURE OF SUCH MATERIAL SHOULD CREATE A CONFLICT WITH THE DUTY IMPOSED UPON THE COURT BY ARTICLES 33 AND 34 OF ITS STATUTE TO STATE THE REASONS ON WHICH ITS JUDGMENTS ARE BASED AND TO GIVE SUCH JUDGMENT IN OPEN COURT, OR WITH THE DUTY IMPOSED ON THE ADVOCATE GENERAL BY THE SECOND PARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 166 OF THE EEC TREATY TO DELIVER AN OPINION IN PUBLIC . IN THE EVENT OF SUCH A SITUATION ' S ARISING THE COURT MUST REMAIN FREE TO EXCLUDE FROM THE FILE ANY DOCUMENTS OR PARTS OF DOCUMENTS WHICH WOULD MAKE IMPOSSIBLE A PUBLIC STATEMENT OF THE REASONS ON WHICH ITS JUDGMENT IS BASED, AND TO TAKE ACCOUNT OF SUCH EXCLUSION WHEN DECIDING THE CASE .
Operative part
ON THOSE GROUNDS,
THE COURT,
HAVING HEARD THE VIEWS OF THE ADVOCATE GENERAL,
HEREBY ORDERS AS FOLLOWS :
1 . CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT SHALL BE ENSURED FOR THE DOCUMENTS AND PARTS OF DOCUMENTS WHOSE CONFIDENTIAL NATURE HAS BEEN CLAIMED BY THE APPLICANT AND ACCEPTED BY THE DEFENDANTS .
2.THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT SHALL DECIDE UPON ANY SUBSEQUENT REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT OF DOCUMENTS OR PARTS OF DOCUMENTS AFTER EXAMINING THE DOCUMENTS AND PARTS OF DOCUMENTS IN QUESTION AND HEARING THE DEFENDANTS . IF SUCH TREATMENT IS REFUSED HE SHALL FIX A PERIOD WITHIN WHICH THE APPLICANT MAY WITHDRAW THE DOCUMENTS OR PARTS OF DOCUMENTS TO WHICH THE REFUSAL RELATES .
3.DOCUMENTS WHICH HAVE BEEN RECOGNIZED TO BE WHOLLY OR PARTLY CONFIDENTIAL SHALL BE PLACED IN A SPECIAL FILE WHICH SHALL ONLY BE DISCLOSED TO THE PRINCIPAL PARTIES AND THE OFFICERS OF THE COURT . THE APPLICANT SHALL MARK DISTINCTLY ALL DOCUMENTS OR PARTS OF DOCUMENTS WHOSE CONFIDENTIAL NATURE HAS BEEN RECOGNIZED AND SHALL SUPPLY THE REGISTRY WITH THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF COPIES .
4.THE COURT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO EXCLUDE FROM THE FILE DOCUMENTS OR PARTS OF DOCUMENTS RECOGNIZED AS CONFIDENTIAL IF THE USE OF SUCH MATERIAL SHOULD PROVE TO BE INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE PUBLIC NATURE OF THE STATEMENT OF THE REASONS ON WHICH ITS DECISIONS ARE BASED OR OF THE OPINIONS OF THE ADVOCATE GENERAL . IN THAT EVENT THE COURT WILL GIVE ITS DECISION ON THE BASIS OF THE MATERIAL CONTAINED IN THE FILE AFTER EXCLUSION OF THE DOCUMENTS IN QUESTION .
5.THE COSTS ARE RESERVED .