Judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 1 June 2022 –

Jindal Saw and Jindal Saw Italia v Commission (Reimposition of a definitive countervailing duty)

(Case T‑441/20) ( 1 )

(Subsidies – Imports of tubes and pipes of ductile cast iron originating in India – Compliance with the judgment of the General Court in Case T‑300/16 – Reimposition of a definitive countervailing duty – Non-repayment in full of the initial definitive countervailing duty – Legal basis – Non-retroactivity – Legal certainty – Article 266 TFEU – Proportionality – Right to effective judicial protection – Article 103 of the Union Customs Code – Registration Regulation – Plea of illegality – Admissibility)

1. Common commercial policy – Protection against subsidisation practices of non-Member States – Anti-subsidy proceeding – Judgment declaring countervailing duty regulations invalid – Adoption of a regulation seeking to implement the declaration of invalidity – Resumption of the proceeding that preceded the regulations declared invalid with the aim of re-imposing the countervailing duties – Admissibility – Conditions – No breach of the principles of legal certainty and non-retroactivity (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2016/1037, Arts 16(1) and 24(1); Council Regulation No 597/2009, Art. 16(1)) (see paras 43, 46-63)

2. Common commercial policy – Protection against subsidisation practices of non-Member States – Anti-subsidy proceeding – Judgment declaring countervailing duty regulations invalid – Adoption of a regulation seeking to implement the declaration of invalidity – Reimposition of the countervailing duties on importations made during the application period of the invalidated regulations – Admissibility – Conditions – No breach of the principles of proportionality and effective judicial protection (Arts 5(1) and (4), 264 and 266 TFEU; Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Art. 47, first para.; European Parliament and Council Regulation 2016/1037) (see paras 80-92, 96, 100-109, 117-123)

3. Common commercial policy – Protection against subsidisation practices of non-Member States – Anti-subsidy proceeding – Judgment declaring countervailing duty regulations invalid – Adoption of a regulation seeking to implement the declaration of invalidity – Discretion of the institutions – Scope – Judicial review – Limits (Art. 266 TFEU; European Parliament and Council Regulation 2016/1037) (see paras 97, 98)

4. Common commercial policy – Protection against subsidisation practices of non-Member States – Anti-subsidy proceeding – Judgment declaring countervailing duty regulations invalid – Adoption of a regulation seeking to implement the declaration of invalidity – Reimposition of the countervailing duties on importations made during the application period of the invalidated regulations – Whether permissible – Expiry of the limitation period of the customs debt – No effect (Art. 296 TFEU; European Parliament and Council Regulation No 952/2013, Art. 103(1)) (see paras 134-139)

5. Plea of illegality – Measures the illegality of which may be pleaded – Anti-subsidy proceeding – Judgment declaring countervailing duty regulations invalid – Adoption of a regulation seeking to implement the declaration of invalidity – Reimposition of the countervailing duties on importations made during the application period of the invalidated regulations – Regulation ordering the national authorities to register importations of the product concerned in the context of the re-imposition procedure – Preparatory act which is not challengeable by an annulment action – Admissibility of the plea of illegality (Arts 263, second para. and 288 TFEU) (see paras 145-154)

6. Common commercial policy – Protection against subsidisation practices of non-Member States – Anti-subsidy proceeding – Judgment declaring countervailing duty regulations invalid – Adoption of a regulation seeking to implement the declaration of invalidity – Reimposition of the countervailing duties on importations made during the application period of the invalidated regulations– Regulation ordering the national authorities to register importations of the product concerned in the context of the reimposition procedure – Admissibility (European Parliament and Council Regulation 2016/1037, Art. 24(5)) (see paras 157-163)

Operative part

The Court:

1. Dismisses the action;

2. Orders Jindal Saw Ltd and Jindal Saw Italia SpA to pay the costs.

( 1 ) OJ C 297, 7.9.2020.