Annual report of the Hearing Officer for trade proceedings 2019.
Date: 2022-07-12
Institutions: Directorate-General for Trade and Economic Security
Subjects: activity report, commercial arbitration, international standard, trade policy, trade restriction

Annual Report of the Hearing 
Officer for Trade Proceedings
2019

Trade
3

Selection of publications completed in February 2020 – Manuscript completed in April 2020 Neither the 
European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use that 
might be made of the information included in this publication.

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2020

© European Union, 2020 Reuse is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. The reuse policy of 
European Commission documents is regulated by Decision 2011/833/EU (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39).

PDF  

ISBN 978-92-76-27728-6  

doi: 10.2781/055133  

NG-01-20-769-EN-N

 
Annual Report of the Hearing
Officer for Trade Proceedings
2019

CONTENTS

1.Context and overview ..................................................................................................................................................................................................1
2.Evolution of Activities 2019 ..................................................................................................................................................................................2
3.Hearings ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................3
AD 649 – Urea and ammonium nitrate (UAN) – 3 hearings and 1 written intervention .............................................3
AD652 - Steel Road Wheels (SRW) - originating in the People’s Republic of China -1 hearing ..............................3
Solar Panels - UT - Sunowe -Solar panel undertaking (‘UT’): invalidation of UT invoices for one exporting 
producer – 1 hearing ...............................................................................................................................................................................................3
AS 650 - Anti-Subsidy proceeding concerning imports of Biodiesel originating in Indonesia – 1 hearing and 
1 extension of a deadline .....................................................................................................................................................................................3
RF52-14 - Ferro Silicon – 1 hearing ..............................................................................................................................................................4
4 Other interventions .......................................................................................................................................................................................................4
SF009 R1 – Steel safeguards – 5 intervention requests, no hearings............................................................................................4
Generalised System of Preferences + .................................................................................................................................................................4
Access to documents ......................................................................................................................................................................................................4
Confidentiality .....................................................................................................................................................................................................................4
5 Audit 2019 .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................5
6.Other activities ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................5
7.General matters, policy issues and recommendations ...................................................................................................................5
Consultation on policy issues ....................................................................................................................................................................................5
Recommendations ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................5
Decisions ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................6
8.Main observations ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................6
Hearings ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................6
Transparency .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................7
Parties’ right to good administration ....................................................................................................................................................................7
9.Annex ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................7

SECTION A

1. CONTEXT AND OVERVIEW

The  primary  role  of  the  Hearing  Officer  is  to  guarantee 
the  rights  of  defence  of  interested  parties  and  thereby 
contribute to ensure that the rules are implemented in an 
objective and transparent manner in trade proceedings. 

Certain ground rules of the rights of defence are laid down 
in  the  EU  Charter  of  Fundamental  Rights  as  follows:  the 
right of every person (i) “to be heard, before any individual 
measure which would affect him or her adversely is taken”, 
(ii)  “to  have  his  or  her  affairs  handled  impartially,  fairly 
and within a reasonable time” and (iii) “to have access to 
his or her file, while respecting the legitimate interests of 
confidentiality and of professional and business secrecy”.

More specific rules for parties involved in trade proceedings 
are  contained  in  the  basic  regulations  dealing  with  the 
different types of trade defence instruments, such as the 
anti-dumping, anti-subsidy and safeguards regulations, or 
in the trade barriers regulation. The role and the powers of 
the  Hearing  Officer  for  trade  proceedings  have  first  been 
set out in formal Terms of Reference by a Decision of the 
President  of  the  European  Commission  of  29  February 
2012 on the function and terms of reference of the Hearing 
Officer in certain trade proceedings1, in order to underline the 
Commission’s commitment to guaranteeing due process in 
trade proceedings and to improving the impartiality of the 
function. The Hearing Officer is attached, for administrative 
purposes, to the Commissioner responsible for trade policy; 
however,  he/she  enjoys  independence  in  performing  his 
duties and shall not take instructions in fulfilling his tasks.

In 2018, a major overhaul of TDI legislation took place and 
the  explicit  recognition  of  the  role  of  the  Hearing  Officer 
in  the  basic  Anti-dumping  and  Anti-subsidy  Regulations 
followed.  In  view  of  these  developments,  the  Terms  of 
Reference of the Hearing Officer have been updated, and 
modernised by Decision of the President of the European 
Commission of 21 February 20192. 

The  status  of  the  Hearing  Officer  as  independent  entity 
remains unchanged. As before, the Terms of Reference lay 
down  detailed  rules  on  the  interventions  of  the  Hearing 
Officer in  all aspects of a trade proceeding and throughout 
all  phases  of  the  proceedings.  They  circumscribe  the 
procedure  for  hearings  conducted  by  the  Hearing  Officer. 
Furthermore,  the  Hearing  Officer  has  decision-making 
powers  on  certain  procedural  issues,  such  as  access  to 
file,  extension  of  deadlines  and  the  confidential  nature 
of  a  document3  .    At  the  request  of  an  interested  party, 
the  Hearing  Officer  can  also  examine  information  that  is 
confidential by nature, and cannot be disclosed to parties, 
and inform the party whether in the Hearing Officer’s view 
the information has been correctly reflected in the findings 
of the Services. The Hearing Officer is in addition empowered 
to raise with the Commissioner responsible for trade policy 
and the Director General for Trade, any concerns about the 
conduct or content of any trade investigation.

The new Terms of Reference serve to provide for a more 
structured, predictable and transparent process, allowing for 
greater effectiveness of the Hearing Officer’s interventions.

In  this  respect,  it  is  important  that  the  new  Terms  of 
Reference  tackle  issues  that  have  surfaced  over  time  as 
regards the intervention requests by parties. In particular, 
parties have been requesting hearings either too early or 
too late in the process. When the requests come in an early 
stage of the proceeding, the Commission Services will not 
have  made  tangible  progress  with  the  investigation.  The 
hearing with the Hearing Officer then could only serve for 
a presentation of the views and arguments of the parties 
as there will be no elements on which the Hearing Officer 
can  base  any  observations.  When  inversely,  the  hearing 
requests come in at a very late stage of the proceeding, 
it may be too late to take into account valid observations. 
However,  hearing  requests  can  also  concern  very  specific 
actions of the Trade Defence Services, such as the selection 
of a sample, which comes early in the proceeding. Issues of 
access to the file, confidentiality and similar, can come up 
at any stage of the proceeding and can then be raised with 
the Hearing Officer. 

The  interventions  of  the  Hearing  Officer  should  become 
more  effective,  allowing  for  adequate  follow-up  where 
appropriate.  This  is  in  the  interest  of  all  parties  to  a 
proceeding  to  safeguard  their  rights  of  defence,  and 
of  the  investigating  authority,  which  is  bound  by  legal 
deadlines. To this effect, finding a good balance between 
parties’ rights and the time constraints of the proceeding 
is essential. At the same time, the Hearing Officer is not a 
part of the investigation process, but its role is to guarantee 
that the rights of defence of parties are respected by the 
Commission Services. 

Therefore,  while  the  principles  laid  down  in  the  original 
Terms  of  Reference  of  2012  remained  untouched,  the 
inclusion of the following new elements has taken place:

  requests for intervention of the Hearing 

Officer must be submitted in good time and 
expeditiously, so as not to jeopardise the orderly 
conduct of the proceeding:

  to that effect, interested parties should request 
the intervention of the Hearing Officer at the 
earliest possible time following the occurrence of 
the event justifying such intervention;
  hearings with the Hearing Officer should in 

principle only take place if the issues could not 
be settled with the Commission services in due 
course;

  hearing requests should in principle be made 
within the relevant timeframes set for the 
procedure – although there may be valid reasons 
for late requests which the Hearing Officer will 
take into account; and

1  OJ L 107/5 of 19 April 2012.
2  OJ L 60/20 of 28 February 2019. Articles of the Terms of Reference referred to in the body of this Report now refer for convenience to the 

new Terms of Reference.

3  Commission Decision C(2019) 6506 granting a delegation of powers relating to the adoption of certain measures in trade proceedings under 

Article 207 TFEU at the 2307th meeting of the Commission on 11 September 2019.

1

 
 
  the Hearing Officer will in principle not accept or 
consider evidence that has not been submitted 
to the Commission Services in the due course of 
the proceeding.

parties’ rights can be fully upheld. They will contribute to the 
predictability  and  transparency  of  the  process,  in  making 
sure that parties can understand the individual steps of the 
procedure and their role in it;

While the Hearing Officer continues to assess each request 
on its own merits, these elements should encourage parties 
to  come  forward  at  the  right  point  in  time  so  that  their 
arguments can be properly taken into account and be given 
the appropriate follow-up. 

The more information is given to parties on how the general 
principles  that  determine  the  exercise  of  its  functions  by 
the Hearing Officer are translated into practice, the better 
they will be able to raise issues of concern to them in an 
appropriate manner. 
The  timelines  and  further  elements  set  out  above  will 
contribute to creating a more structured process in which 

In  addition,  in  the  interest  of  transparency,  parties  may 
be  provided  with  further  information  on  the  follow-up  of 
hearings and recommendations of the Hearing Officer. 

This  report  has  been  drafted  in  accordance  with  Article 
18(1) of the Terms of Reference and contains a summary 
of the activities in 2019 and main observations.

2.  EVOLUTION OF ACTIVITIES 2019

The  Terms  of  Reference,  both  the  2012  version  and  the 
current version, cover trade proceedings provided for in 10 
basic  Trade  Regulations4.    During  2019  one  of  the  basic 
Regulations  listed  in  the  Annex,  specifically,  Regulation 
(EC) No 868/2004 of the European Parliament and of the 
Council  ,  was  replaced  by  Regulation  (EU)  2019/712  of 
the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council5  of  17  April 
2019 on safeguarding competition in air transport6. While 
technically the scope of competence of the Hearing Officer 
thus did not change, the scope of the new basic Regulation 
itself has extended the scope of its application in relation 
to  fair  competition  in  air  services.  Furthermore,  it  has 
opened  a  possibility  for  the  Hearing  Officer  to  exercise 
their competence in trade proceedings concerning trade in 
services and conducted by other Commission Services than 
those,  responsible  for  trade  defence  and  the  other  areas 
dealt with by DG TRADE.

Historically,  the  vast  majority  of  intervention  requests 
concerned  trade  defence  proceedings  (anti-dumping  and 
anti-subsidy).  Although  only  a  very  few  requests  related 
to  the  Safeguards  Regulation,  the  General  System  of 
Preferences and Trade Barrier Regulation issues have been 
received  before,  in  2019  a  more  substantial  part  of  the 
Hearing Officer’s interventions concerned these areas. This 
diversification was important enough that the methodology 
of the current annual report had to be reconsidered.
In previous years, the same comparative analysis could be 
used as all intervention requests concerned similar type of 
proceedings. Now that the types of proceedings concerned 

have become more diverse, the same approach could no 
longer be applied. The statistics related to interventions in 
anti-dumping and anti-subsidy proceedings are provided in 
Annex 1 to this report for reference purposes.

In  2019,  the  Hearing  Officer  received  altogether  21 
intervention  requests  and  held  7  hearings.  In  a  number 
of  cases,  the  request  for  an  intervention  was  submitted 
simultaneously with a request for a hearing with the services 
responsible for the investigation. The Hearing Officer took 
the view that the interested party should first address their 
concerns to the services and only when a solution could not 
be reached, the Hearing Officer would intervene. 

As a result, interested parties seeking an intervention were 
able to find a solution directly with the investigation teams 
in most of the cases. 

In 2019, only few investigations led to intervention requests. 
These were either requests from several interested parties 
or a number of intervention requests from the same party. 
The interested parties mostly challenged the determinations, 
facts and conclusions of the investigation and in all cases 
the  services  agreed  to  provide  clarifications  or  additional 
disclosures. 

In comparison with previous years, the number of requests 
have been stable since 2017, whereas the number of actual 
hearings held is the same as in 2018.

4  A list of all Trade Regulations covered is provided in Article 1 of the Terms of Reference (ToR).
5  Regulation (EC) No 868/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 concerning protection against subsidisation 

and unfair pricing practices causing injury to Community air carriers in the supply of air services from countries not members of the European 
Community (OJ L 162, 30.4.2004, p. 1).

6  Regulation (EU) 2019/712 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 April 2019 on safeguarding competition in air transport, and 

repealing Regulation (EC) No 868/2004 (OJ L 123,10.5.2019, p.4.)

2

3.  HEARINGS

In  view  of  relatively  few  hearings,  each  case  concerned 
can  be  addressed  individually.  They  are  listed  below  in 
chronological order by the first intervention request.

During all interventions in 2019, the Hearing Officer found 
that  the  procedural  rights  of  the  interested  parties  had 
been respected.

AD 649 – Urea and ammonium nitrate 
(UAN) – 3 hearings and 1 written 
intervention

In 2019 The Hearing Officer was requested to intervene 4 
times in this proceeding, out of which 3 times by the same 
representative of exporting producers concerned.

The first request related to access to a specific document 
in the proceeding. Upon review of the request, the Hearing 
Officer concluded that the rights of defence of interested 
parties were sufficiently protected in principle when having 
access to the consolidated, non-confidential version of the 
complaint rather than to the original form of the complaint.

Later  in  the  proceeding,  following  the  imposition  of 
provisional measures, the same exporting producers came 
forward  with  a  list  of  alleged  deficiencies.  The  Hearing 
Officer  encouraged  the  Commission  Services,  responsible 
for  investigation,  to  disclose  further  information  to  the 
extent  possible  to  facilitate  understanding  of  facts  and 
findings  upon  which  the  Commission  Services  base  their 
conclusions. In particular, the Hearing Officer recommended 
that a sufficiently meaningful summary of a study submitted 
by the exporting producers shall be included in the open file.

Upon  receipt  of  the  Final  Disclosure  Document,  the 
same  exporting  producers  raised  another  list  of  alleged 
deficiencies, which were largely similar to the ones already 
discussed  during  the  previous  hearing.  The  Hearing 
Officer noted the similarities and refrained from repeated 
discussion.

At  the  same  time,  exporting  producers  from  a  different 
country of origin requested an intervention of the Hearing 
Officer in view of their disagreement with the interpretation 
by  the  Commission  services  of  two  relevant  judgements. 
The Hearing Officer observed that the interpretation of the 
court  judgements  also  lies  within  the  competence  of  the 
courts that have made the disputed ruling.

AD652 - Steel Road Wheels (SRW) - 
originating in the People’s Republic of 
China -1 hearing

An exporting producer challenged the application of Article 
18 of the basic Regulation.

The Hearing Officer considered that the exporting producer, 
in  view  of  their  best  efforts,  should  not  properly  be 
considered  as  non-cooperating  in  the  sense  of  providing 
false or misleading confirmation. 

3

On that basis, the Hearing Officer invited the Commission 
services to further clarify the use of Article 18 of the basic 
Regulation and to consider the new and additional evidence 
received in the course of investigation, to the extent possible.

The  Hearing  Officer  invited  the  Commission  services  to 
reflect  the  above  considerations  and  the  new  evidence 
in  the  wording  of  the  regulation  applying  the  provisional 
measures.

Solar Panels - UT - Sunowe -Solar panel 
undertaking (‘UT’): invalidation of UT 
invoices for one exporting producer – 1 
hearing

The  Hearing  Officer  was  requested  to  intervene  in  this 
investigation by the exporting producer concerned. 

The exporting producer raised the issue of interpretation of 
the provisions of the UT regarding the customs treatment 
of the goods imported during the period of the UT but kept 
in inventory. 

Considering  that  interpretation  of  provisions  of  the  UT 
does not fall within the competence of the Hearing Officer 
and at the request of participants to have the discussion 
formally on record it was suggested that the participants of 
the hearing submit summaries of their  statements made 
during the hearing at their earliest opportunity. The Hearing 
Officer  concluded  that  at  this  stage  the  positions  of  the 
services and the interested party appear to be irreconcilable.

It has been understood that the interested party may decide 
to pursue the matter further through the competent courts. 

AS 650 - Anti-Subsidy proceeding 
concerning imports of Biodiesel originating 
in Indonesia – 1 hearing and 1 extension of 
a deadline

In this proceeding the Hearing Officer has been requested 
to intervene by two different parties.  

One party requested an extension of deadlines to comment 
on  the  provisional  regulation.  The  Hearing  Officer  did  not 
however  find  any  exceptional  circumstances  that  would 
justify such prolongation.

Another  party  requested  the  intervention  of  the  Hearing 
Officer  and  a  hearing  took  place.  The  exporting  producer 
claimed  that  disclosure  on  the  undercutting  calculations 
was  insufficient,  that  certain  meaningful  non-confidential 
summaries were lacking, that information on the situation 
of  the  Union  industry  was  incomplete,  and  that  certain 
verifications should have been undertaken. 

The  intervention  of  the  Hearing  Officer  resulted  in  the 
disclosure of additional information. 

RF52-14 - Ferro Silicon – 1 hearing

The  applicant  had  requested  a  suspension  of  the  refund 
applications  as  several  judicial  proceedings  were  pending 
before the EU courts as they could affect the outcome of 
this  investigation.  Thereafter,  the  applicant  had  appealed 
one  of  the  rulings  and  subsequently  requested  another 
suspension of the application. 

Although  the  Hearing  Officer  considered  that  there  were 
some  merits  in  relation  to  the  concerns  of  the  applicant, 

there were also merits to the Commission services’ reasons 
not  to  extend  the  suspension,  especially  considering 
the risk of losing data over time. As to the timing of the 
expected judgment of the Court of Justice, there might be 
probabilities but there could not be certainty. 

She  considered  that  the  applicant  and  the  Commission 
services  should  reflect  on  a  possible  solution  acceptable 
to both sides within the limits set by the law, and hold a 
meeting to reach an agreement.

Access to documents

In case AD 649, the Hearing Officer received a request for 
intervention  that  the  Commission  services  should  grant 
access to the initial complaint that had been lodged. The 
request for intervention was based on the Ombudsman’s 
decision that in a review, the initial request forms part of 
the overall reasons on the basis of which the opening of 
an expiry review is based. The Hearing Officer found that 
the situation in a new complaint was not comparable and 
that in addition, having verified the files, no specific reasons 
would lead to a different conclusion.

Confidentiality

Several  requests  for  intervention,  which  did  not  lead  to 
a  hearing,  concerned  the  granting  of  more  extensive 
disclosure  because  parties  considered  that  their  rights 
of  defence  were  not  respected  because  of  the  restrictive 
practice of the Commission Services.

4.  OTHER INTERVENTIONS

SF009 R1 – Steel safeguards – 5 
intervention requests, no hearings

In  this  proceeding,  the  same  Union  importer  three  times 
requested  intervention  of  the  Hearing  Officer,  specifically 
calling  for  reopening  of  the  investigation  and  changes  in 
the product scope concerned by the measures.

The Hearing Officer found that these requests were outside 
the competence of the Hearing Officer, including the fact 
that these requests that were submitted also outside the 
timeframe of the investigation.

Nevertheless,  the  Hearing  Officer  agreed  to  meet  the 
party after the end of the investigation to explain the legal 
situation.

Other 
intervention  requests  concerned  requests  for 
additional  disclosures  or  clarifications  and  were  dealt 
directly with the Commissions services responsible for the 
investigation.

Generalised System of Preferences +

On 11 February 2019 the Commission initiated the procedure 
for temporary withdrawal of the tariff preferences provided 
to the Kingdom of Cambodia under Article 19 of Regulation 
(EU) No 978/20127. 

The Hearing Officer was consulted on how to ensure that 
the  procedural  rights  of  interested  parties  are  explained 
adequately.

7  OJ C 55, 12.2.2019, p.11.

4

5.  AUDIT 2019

In 2019 the European Court of Auditors (ECA) carried out 
a  performance  audit  of  the  Commission’s  management 
of  trade  to  discuss  their  work  related  to  trade  defence 
instruments, and their cooperation with DG TRADE. 

In their clearing letter concerning the performance audit on 
the Commission’s role as an enforcer of EU trade defence 
policy  with  regard  to  the  work  of  the  hearing  officer  for 
trade proceedings, the ECA concluded that, in spite of the 
administrative attachment of the Hearing Officer’s staff to 
DG Trade, at the time directly to the Director F, the Hearing 
Officer acts independently from a functional point of view. 
This independence relies on the personalities of the persons 
involved rather than on the institutional setting. 

The ECA further observed that the new Terms of Reference 
now stipulate that the Commissioner for Trade can appoint 
an  acting  Hearing  Officer  in  case  of  a  conflict  of  interest 
or an inability to act, thus ensuring business continuity in 
unforeseen circumstances.

6.  OTHER ACTIVITIES

In  2019,  the  Hearing  Officer  continued  with  her  outreach 
activities  and  presented  the  changes  in  the  Terms  of 
Reference, the Annual Report, and observations pertaining 
thereto,  to  the  Member  States  in  the  Working  Party  on 
Trade Questions.

As  usual,  the  Hearing  Officer  presented  her  observations 
and  information  in  dedicated  sessions  during  the  annual 
trainings in for the Trade Defence Services, and for the staff 
working in EU Delegations.

On  24  October  2019,  the  Hearing  Officer  met  with  the 
business  association  Aegis/UNIFE,  to  explain  the  role  and 
functioning of the Hearing Officer to the Union industry, as 
well as to reply to their questions.

The  ECA  also  acknowledged  the  importance  that  the 
Hearing  Officer  is  invited  to  the  meetings  of  the  Trade 
Defence Committee(s) and that this good practice ensures 
direct communication between the Hearing Officer and the 
Committee members, which increases both independence 
and  transparency.  And  that,  since  June  2018,  DG  TRADE 
includes the Hearing Officer in all inter-service consultations, 
even for cases without hearings. This was recognised as a 
good practice, formalised in the 2019 Terms of Reference, 
which  ensures  that  the  Hearing  Officer  receives  all  draft 
decisions  in  a  timely  manner.  This  facilitates  the  Hearing 
Officer’s  follow-up  on  cases  in  which  there  have  been 
hearings and other interventions. In addition, it responds to 
the requirement in Article 4(8) of the Terms of Reference, 
namely that the Hearing Officer shall be informed “of any 
substantial change of the Commission’s position” up to the 
definitive measures.

On  10  December  2019,  the  Hearing  Officer  participated 
in  a  Civil  Society  Dialogue  on  Trade  Defence  instruments 
and rights of parties in trade proceedings, together with the 
Commission Services managing trade defence instruments.
The  Hearing  Officer  highlighted  the  most  recent  changes 
and the exact role and competences of the Hearing Officer 
in  particular  in  the  framework  of  the  modernized  trade 
defense system of the EU. In particular, she stressed that 
the  Hearing  Officer  is  a  fully  independent  Commission 
official who is not part of the Trade Defense Services, nor 
of DG Trade for that matter, and not involved directly in the 
conduct of investigations. 

This was, in fact, the first time the Hearing Officer addressed 
the larger civil society to raise awareness of the possibility 
to  make  their  concerns  known  and  thus,  to  safeguard 
the  rights  of  defense  of  the  interested  parties  in  trade 
proceedings.

7.  GENERAL MATTERS, POLICY ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Consultation on policy issues

Recommendations 

The  Hearing  Officer  shall  be  consulted  by  the  Director 
responsible on policy issues regarding procedural matters 
and substantive issues, which have an impact on the rights 
of  interested  parties  in  accordance  with  Article  4.10  of 
the Terms of Reference. In 2019, the Hearing Officer was 
consulted by the Commission Services on several templates, 
and on the integration of the role of the Hearing Officer in 
the  elaboration  of  the  general  safeguards  mechanism  in 
the framework of the EU’s Free Trade. 

In 2019, the Hearing Officer issued a recommendation to 
the  Commission  Services  to  disclose  the  non-confidential 
version  of  an  initial  review  request,  having  regard  to  the 
European Ombudsman’s findings in an identical case which 
had  been  accepted  by  the  Commission,  and  to  disclose 
certain  data  to  an  interested  party  as  these  data  had 
already been disclosed in another investigation.

5

                                                           
Decisions

The Terms of Reference confer on the Hearing Officer certain 
decision-making powers on a number of issues (disputes 
on  access  to  file,  confidential  nature  of  a  document, 
deadlines). The Hearing Officer has decided several times 
on  the  extension  of  deadlines  for  parties.  Nevertheless, 
since the entry into force of the first version of the Terms 
of Reference in April 2012, as a rule a mutually acceptable 
solution was found when relevant issues were raised.

8.  MAIN OBSERVATIONS

In  comparison  with  the  previous  years,  the  number  of 
overall  requests  per  year  in  2019  has  been  stable  since 
2017, whereas the number of actual hearings held is the 
same as in 2018. With all the necessary caution, it seems 
that the parties’ interest to request an intervention of the 
hearing  officer  remains  stable.  The  apparent  stabilisation 
of hearings at a lower level than in 2017 could be ascribed 
to the policy of the Hearing Oficer to encourage parties to 
settle their issues directly with the Services, before turning 
to the Hearing Officer. This takes account of the fact that 
the  Hearing  Officer  is  not  part  of  the  investigation  team. 
Since  2017,  an  intervention  of  the  Hearing  Officer  was 
requested  each  year  at  around  the  level  of  30%  of  the 
ongoing investigations. 

In  2019  all  hearings  held  were  requested  by  exporting 
producers; as regards the requests for interventions – the 
bulk of requests were received from exporting producers.  
The Hearing Officer also received requests from two Union 
importers in the Steel Safeguard review investigation and 
in another review investigation a sampled Union importer 
requested the granting of anonymity. This marks a deviation 
from all previous years when the Union industry on average 
accounted for 10-20% of all intervention requests.

The  number  of  intervention  requests  filed  by  European 
companies  usually  depends  on  the  particularity  of  the 
issues at stake and varies year by year and case by case. 

The  most  visible  activity  of  the  Hearing  Officer  is  to 
organise  and  chair  hearings  at  the  request  of  interested 
parties. These hearings are organised in a particular way 
in order to maximise the inclusion of all services concerned 
in  the  decision-making  and  to  achieve  a  high  degree  of 
transparency for the interested parties of a case. In 2019, 
the Hearing Officer continued the established practice and 
procedure. 

The  final  hearing  reports  are  distributed  to  all  invited 
participants and put in the case file (confidential and non-
confidential  versions)  for  inspection  by  interested  parties. 
In  2019,  the  Services  have  followed  the  proposals  and 
suggestions of the Hearing Officer. 

In  2019,  other  intervention  requests  took  on  more 
importance as compared to previous years.  These consisted 

8  Article 4.10 of the Terms of Reference.

6

in relatively straightforward requests such as prolongation 
of deadlines, but also in requests related to matters that 
are  more  complex.  In  particular,  an  issue  of  policy  linked 
to  access  to  documents  arose,  such  as  making  available 
to parties the earlier version of a complaint, which can be 
different  from  the  final  version  on  which  an  initiation  of 
proceedings  may  be  based,  demanded  careful  attention. 
Another  issue  concerned  the  extent  to  which  the  non-
confidential  version  of  a  complaint  provided  for  the  right 
balance between protection of business confidentiality and 
the rights of defence.  Cooperation with the Trade Defence 
Services

A  formal  consultation  mechanism  is  in  place8  obliging 
the  Director  responsible  for  the  above  policy  changes 
or updates to consult the Hearing Officer. As a matter of 
course, the Hearing Officer is now involved in all inter-service 
consultations initiated by Directorate responsible for Trade 
Defence matters, in all proposals sent to the Commission 
for adoption. The Hearing Officer should likewise be invited 
to  all  meetings  of  the  Trade  Defence  Committee(s)  and 
noted that sometimes there was still a lack of knowledge 
of the Trade Defence Services. In 2019, the Hearing Officer 
was further consulted on the development of a number of 
standard documents pertaining to the procedural rights of 
parties.  Consultations  also  took  place  on  the  integration 
of the role of the Hearing Officer in the elaboration of the 
general  safeguards  mechanism  in  the  framework  of  the 
EU’s Free Trade Agreements. Some units of the DG Trade 
Directorate  responsible  for  Trade  Defence  occasionally 
consulted the Hearing Officer on other issues arising from 
their case-by-case decisions, and her advice was sought on 
matters related to GSP proceedings. 

Hearings

The  main  activity  of  the  Hearing  Officer  is  to  organise 
and  chair  hearings  at  the  request  of  interested  parties. 
These hearings are organised in a particular way in order 
to  maximise  the  participation  of  all  services  concerned 
in  the  decision-making  and  to  achieve  a  high  degree  of 
transparency for the interested parties in a case. 
In  2019,  the  Services  have  followed  the  proposals  and 
suggestions of the Hearing Officer.

 
Transparency

Further  progress  has  been  made  in  2019  to  improve 
interested parties’ access to information important for the 
defence of their interests, notably in terms of the contents 
of disclosures. The Hearing Officer has in several instances 
successfully  encouraged  the  Services  to  provide  more 
information to the parties to the extent that this does not 
endanger legitimate concerns of the other party

Parties’ right to good administration

The Hearing Officer’s Reports for the years 2015 and 2016 
expressed the concern that the consultations on trade policy 
updates  regarding  procedural  matters  and  substantive 
issues  having  an  impact  on  interested  parties  had  been 
carried  out  only  occasionally  rather  than  systemically.  As 
set out in the Report covering the years 2017 and 2018, 
a certain number of mechanisms have been put in place 

leading  to  a  significant  improvement  of  the  situation.  In 
2019 these mechanisms have been working in an overall 
acceptable manner. 

Likewise,  the  mentioned  Reports  for  the  years  2015  and 
2016 expressed concerns about the consistent and correct 
application  of  the  established  rules  and  procedures  for 
anti-dumping  and  anti-subsidy  proceedings  throughout 
the  Commission  Services  responsible  for  investigations. 
In  this  respect  it  can  be  noted  that  over  the  past  years, 
the  Commission  services  have  made  considerable  efforts 
towards  standardisation  of  procedures  including  the 
setting up of standard documents and dedicated training 
especially of newcomers. The margin of discretion left to 
individual case teams or units is therefore much reduced. 
However quality management both in regard to substance 
and process remains of course essential in the use of the 
instruments of trade defence under EU trade laws.  

9.  ANNEX

Anti-dumping and anti-subsidy proceedings concerned by intervention requests in 2019

The following tables demonstrate the actual numbers and the ratio between the ongoing trade proceedings and intervention 
requests received by the Hearing Officer compared to previous 4 years. The methodology there is the same as used before 
for comparison and cross-reference purposes.

The actual number of hearings has stabilized during the last two years after a substantial change in comparison to the 
previous years. The difference between the number of requests for interventions, the number of hearings and the number 
of on-going trade proceedings in 2018 and 2019 has been remarkably similar. 

Table 1: Trade proceedings concerned by intervention requests vs. ongoing proceedings 
(actual numbers)

7

Table 2: Trade proceedings concerned by intervention requests vs. ongoing investigations 
(in %)

Table 3. Trade proceedings concerned by intervention requests vs. ongoing proceedings 
and the number of intervention requests vs. hearings

8

Table 4: Interventions by case type

Type

Cases ongoing 
1.1.2019

Cases initiated 
2019

Sum of cases 
ongoing during 
2019

Cases in which 
the HO was 
requested to 
intervene

Initial cases (Art 5 AD, Art 10 AS)

11

16

Reviews

Other

Expiry

Interim

New exporter

Re-opening of a case

UT Withdrawal/Implementation

Pre-Initiation

Refund

0

19

3

8

3

1

0

7

5

8

2

1

6

1

0

0

27

5

27

5

9

9

2

0

7

8

0

4

2

0

0

1

0

2

Total

52

39

91

17

in %

30%

0%

15%

40%

0%

0%

50%

0%

29%

9

 
N
G
-
0
1
-
2
0
-
7
6
9
-
E
N
-
N

More information about the Hearing Officer: 
https://ec.europa.eu/trade/trade-policy-and-you/contacts/hearing-officer/

Hearings Officer’s terms of reference:
http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2011/695/oj

Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union: 
http://data.europa.eu/eli/treaty/char_2012/oj

Information on the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Trade:
https://ec.europa.eu/trade/index_en.htm

Trade
2