Keywords

Subject of the case

Operative part



Keywords

Actions for annulment — Natural or legal persons — Interest in bringing proceedings — Action brought against a regulation imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty — Subsequent adoption of a regulation instituting a definitive anti-dumping duty — No further interest in bringing an action (Art. 263 TFEU; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 113) (see paras 25-33)

2. Judicial proceedings — Action before the General Court — Possibility to dismiss an action on the merits without ruling beforehand on the objections of inadmissibility raised by the defendant (see para. 35)

3. Common commercial policy — Protection against dumping — Regulation instituting a definitive anti-dumping duty — Illegality of the regulation instituting a provisional anti-dumping duty — Impact on the legality of the regulation instituting a definitive duty — Conditions (see para. 39)

4. Common commercial policy — Protection against dumping — Injury — Assessment of the interest of the Union — No error of assessment (Council Regulation No 1225/2009, Arts 3(5) and 21) (see paras 37-55)

5. Procedure — Application initiating proceedings — Formal requirements — Brief 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)

Subject of the case

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

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.