Keywords

Summary



Keywords

1. Common commercial policy - Protection against dumping - Fixing of anti-dumping duties - Imposition of a specific duty

(Council Regulation No 2423/88)

2. Procedure - Application originating proceedings - Formal requirements - Summary of the pleas on which the application is based

(EC Statute of the Court of Justice, Arts 19, first para., and 46, first para.; Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, Art. 44(1)(c))

3. Acts of the institutions - Statement of reasons - Obligation - Scope - Decision applying the competition rules

(EC Treaty, Art. 190 (now Art. 253 EC))

4. Competition - Dominant position - Abuse - Participation by an undertaking in an investigation conducted by the Community institutions in an anti-dumping procedure - None

(EC Treaty, Art. 86 (now Art. 82 EC))

5. Competition - Administrative procedure - Principle of full disclosure between parties - Scope - Limits - Disclosure of the file to complainants

(EC Treaty, Arts 85 and 86 (now Arts 81 EC and 82 EC); Council Regulation No 17, Art. 19)

Summary

1. The imposition of a specific duty, as opposed to fixing the duty by reference to a threshold import price, makes it possible to minimise the risk of duties being evaded by manipulations of prices, since the amount of duty levied is not reduced if exporters reduce their prices. That method of proceeding enables a minimum price to be guaranteed for the product affected by the anti-dumping duty in the Community, while allowing imports at fair prices, that is, prices which enable a Community producer to realise an adequate profit margin.

( see para. 52 )

2. Under the first paragraph of Article 19 of the Statute of the Court of Justice, applicable to the Court of First Instance by virtue of the first paragraph of Article 46 thereof, and Article 44(1)(c) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance, all applications must indicate the subject-matter of the proceedings and include a brief statement of the grounds relied on. The information given must be sufficiently clear and precise to enable the defendant to prepare his defence and the Court of First Instance to decide the case. In order to ensure legal certainty and the sound administration of justice, if an action is to be admissible the essential facts and law on which it is based must be apparent from the text of the application itself, even if only stated briefly, provided the statement is coherent and comprehensible. In particular, a mere abstract statement of the pleas in law in the application does not alone satisfy the requirements of the Statute of the Court and the Rules of Procedure and the words summary of the pleas in law used in those texts mean that the application must specify the nature of the pleas on which the application is based.

( see paras 192-193 )

3. The statement of reasons required by Article 190 of the Treaty (now Article 253 EC) must be appropriate to the act at issue and must disclose in a clear and unequivocal fashion the reasoning followed by the institution which adopted the measure in question in such a way as to enable the persons concerned to ascertain the reasons for the measure and to enable the competent Community court to exercise its power of review. As regards more particularly a Commission decision rejecting a complaint alleging infringement of the competition rules, the Commission is not obliged to adopt a position on all the arguments relied on by the parties concerned in support of their request; it is sufficient if it sets out the facts and legal considerations having decisive importance in the context of the decision.

( see paras 198-199 )

4. Recourse to a remedy in law and, in particular, participation by an undertaking in an investigation conducted by the Community institutions in an anti-dumping proceeding cannot be deemed, of itself, to be contrary to Article 86 of the Treaty (now Article 82 EC). The anti-dumping proceeding aims to re-establish undistorted competition in the market in the interest of the Community and is reflected in a thorough investigation conducted by the Community institutions during which the interested parties are heard and which may lead to the adoption of a binding Community measure. To assert that mere recourse to such a procedure is, of itself, contrary to Article 86 of the Treaty amounts to denying undertakings the right to avail themselves of legal instruments established in the interest of the Community.

( see para. 213 )

5. The principle that there must be full disclosure in the administrative procedure before the Commission for the application of competition rules to undertakings applies only to undertakings which may be penalised by a Commission decision finding an infringement of Article 85 or Article 86 of the Treaty (now Articles 81 EC and 82 EC), since the rights of third parties, as laid down by Article 19 of Regulation No 17, are limited to the right to participate in the administrative procedure. It follows that the Commission enjoys some latitude in taking account, in its decision, of the written observations and any oral observations presented by them.

In particular, third parties cannot claim a right of access to the file held by the Commission on the same basis as the undertakings under investigation. A complainant may not in any circumstances be given access to documents containing business secrets.

( see para. 229 )