Case T-390/24: Action brought on 26 July 2024 – Eurofer v Commission
Date: 2024-07-26
Institutions: General Court
Subjects: Indonesia, Taiwan, Türkiye, Viet Nam, anti-dumping duty, flat product, import (EU), originating product, steel








C_202405332EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/5332


9.9.2024






Action brought on 26 July 2024 – Eurofer v Commission


(Case T-390/24)

(C/2024/5332)
Language of the case: English

Parties


Applicant: Eurofer, Association Européenne de l’Acier, AISBL (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: O. Prost, C. Bouvarel and O. Chef, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:






—


declare the action for annulment admissible;










—


annul Article 1, paragraphs 1, 3 and 4, of the European Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/1267 of 6 May 2024 extending the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2012 on imports of stainless steel cold-rolled flat products originating in Indonesia to imports of stainless steel cold-rolled flat products consigned from Taiwan and Vietnam, whether declared as originating in Taiwan and Vietnam or not, and terminating the investigation concerning the possible circumvention of anti-dumping measures imposed by that Regulation by imports of stainless steel cold-rolled flat products consigned from Türkiye, whether declared as originating in Türkiye or not, (1) insofar as it concerns the exempted exporting producers : (i) Yieh United Steel Corporation, (ii) Tang Eng Iron Works Co., Ltd. (YUSCO group), (iii) Chia Far Industrial Factory Co., Ltd., (iv) Yuan Long Stainless Steel Corp (v) Tung Mung Development Co., Ltd., (vi) Walsin Lihwa Corporation, (vii) Posco VST and (viii) Lam Khang; the remainder of the regulation remains valid and in force;










—


order the European Commission to bear the costs of the proceedings.





Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.






1.


First plea in law, alleging that the Commission committed an error of law in its application of a ‘producer-based’, rather than a ‘product-based’ approach to the thresholds set out in the assembly operation test.










2.


Second plea in law, alleging that the contested regulation is vitiated insofar as it exempts the six cooperating Taiwanese producers because the Commission committed a manifest error of assessment and of law through its restrictive interpretation of the temporal requirement in the assembly operation test, its misapplication of the facts which can only entail that its finding of circumvention at country-level must also be applied to the cooperating producers and the failure to address the substantial increase of exports to the EU between 2020 and 2021.










3.


Third plea in law, alleging that the Commission’s statement of reasons regarding the absence of evidence of dumping is defective.






(1)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/1267 of 6 May 2024 extending the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2012 on imports of stainless steel cold-rolled flat products originating in Indonesia to imports of stainless steel cold-rolled flat products consigned from Taiwan and Vietnam, whether declared as originating in Taiwan and Vietnam or not, and terminating the investigation concerning the possible circumvention of anti-dumping measures imposed by that Regulation by imports of stainless steel cold-rolled flat products consigned from Türkiye, whether declared as originating in Türkiye or not (OJ L 2024/1267).


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/5332/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)