Keywords

Summary



Keywords

++++

1 . Application for a declaration that a measure is void - Action against a regulation imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty - Adoption in the course of the proceedings of a regulation, also challenged, imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty at the same rate - Application devoid of purpose - No need to give a decision

( EEC Treaty, Art . 173 )

2 . Common commercial policy - Protection against dumping - Dumping margin - Determination of the normal value - Imports from non-market economy countries - Criterion to be given priority - Price at which the like product of a market economy third country is actually sold

( Council Regulation No 2176/84, Art . 2 ( 5 ) )

3 . Common commercial policy - Protection against dumping - Dumping margin - Determination of the normal value and the export price - Allowances to enable a fair comparison to be made - Factors for which allowance may be made

( Council Regulation No 2176/84, Art . 2 ( 9 ) and ( 10 ) )

4 . Common commercial policy - Protection against dumping - Injury - Factors to be taken into consideration - Volume of imports of dumped products - The combined effects of imports to be assessed, not the effect of each exporter' s exports individually

( Council Regulation No 2176/84, Art . 4 ( 2 ) )

5 . Common commercial policy - Protection against dumping - Offer of price undertakings - Acceptance - Discretion of the institutions

( Council Regulation No 2176/84, Art . 10 )

Summary

1 . An action against a regulation imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty becomes without purpose, so that there is no need for the Court to give a decision, where it is replaced in the course of the proceedings by a regulation, also challenged by the applicant, imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and where the amounts secured by the provisional duty have been collected under the regulation imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty at the rate imposed by that regulation .

2 . In the framework of the procedure for imposing anti-dumping duties, the normal value of the dumped product must be established, in the case of imports from non-market economy countries, in accordance with the rules laid down in Article 2 ( 5 ) of Regulation No 2176/84 . That provision, which is intended to prevent account from being taken of prices and costs in non-market economy countries which are not normally the result of market forces, gives priority to the price at which the like product of a market economy third country is sold .

3 . In the framework of the procedure for imposing anti-dumping duties, Article 2 ( 9 ) and ( 10 ) of Regulation No 2176/84 provides for allowance to be made, for the purpose of a fair comparison between the export price and the normal value after they have been calculated in accordance with the prescribed methods, for differences affecting price comparability, relating to the physical characteristics of the product, quantities, conditions and terms of sale and import charges and indirect taxes . These allowances must be made solely by reason of differences concerning the abovementioned factors .

4 . In the context of the assessment of injury caused by dumping, the volume of imports is, according to Article 4 ( 2 ) of Regulation No 2176/84, only one of the factors to be taken into account .

Where the dumped products come from different countries, it is in principle necessary to assess the combined effects of such imports . It is consistent with the objectives of the said regulation that Community authorities should be able to examine the effect on Community industry of all such imports and consequently take appropriate action against all exporters, even if the volume of each individual exporter' s exports is relatively small .

5 . None of the provisions of Regulation No 2176/84 obliges the institutions to accept price undertakings offered by traders concerned by an investigation prior to the imposition of anti-dumping duties . On the contrary, it is clear from Article 10 of the regulation that it is for the institutions to determine whether such undertakings are acceptable .

It is within the discretion of the institutions to refuse a proposal for an undertaking, after examining it, on the ground that the price increase offered is not sufficient to eliminate injury, is spread over too long a period and is subject to a condition compliance with which cannot be verified by the institutions .