12.1.2023
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
L 10/3
(15)
As explained in recitals 36 and 37 of the provisional Regulation, questionnaire responses where either cross-checked or verified at the premises of the responding party.
(16)
Verification visit pursuant to Article 16 of the basic Regulation was carried out at the premises of one user.
The name of this user is not disclosed for confidential reasons in accordance with recital 5 of the provisional Regulation.
1.7.
Investigation period and period considered (17)
As stated in recital 38 of the provisional Regulation, the investigation of dumping and injury covered the period from 1 October 2020 to 30 September 2021 (‘the investigation period’).
The examination of trends relevant for the assessment of injury covered the period from 1 January 2018 to the end of the investigation period (‘the period considered’).
1.8.
Registration (18)
The Commission made imports of the product concerned subject to registration by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/934 (4) (‘the registration Regulation’).
(19)
Hands claimed that the decision for registration of imports was unfounded, as the conditions were not met pursuant to Article 14(5) of the basic Regulation.
(20)
The Commission recalled that the legal basis for registration is Article 14(5a) of the basic Regulation, according to which, the Commission shall register the imports of the product concerned during the period of pre-disclosure pursuant to Article 19a of the basic Regulation, unless there is sufficient evidence that the requirements of Article 10(4)(c) and (d) are not met.
In this respect, the Commission established that there was no conclusive evidence showing that the registration of imports of the product concerned during the period of the pre-disclosure was not warranted in this case.
Indeed, since the publication of the notice of initiation, when exporting producers were aware or should have been aware of the alleged dumping and injury, imports of the product concerned have further increased in a manner which may seriously undermine the remedial effect of the anti-dumping duties also during the pre-disclosure period.
Therefore, the Commission rejected the claims.
(21)
Hands claimed that by publishing the registration Regulation the Commission violated the principle of sound administration.
According to the party no information regarding the Commission’s intention to make imports of the product under investigation subject to registration has been communicated to them before the registration Regulation was published and the import registration came into force, whereas such registration measure does potentially adversely affect its interests.
Absence of communicating necessary information about possibly making imports subject to registration to Hands in a timely, effectively and personal manner before adopting such registration measure and allowing Hands to present its views and to be heard, while Hands is directly affected by that measure, the Commission is in violation of Hands’ fundamental right of defence.
Consequently, the Registration Regulation is invalid and should be repealed.
(22)
The Commission considered that registration is only a preparatory administrative step that may or may not lead to the retroactive imposition of duties at definitive stage.
Registration in itself does not produce any adverse effect on importers and cannot be said to affect their interests (5).
Hands itself did not point to any concrete adverse effects referring merely to ‘potential’ effects.
The only effect of registration is that the Commission instructs the national customs authorities to register the imports into the Union of the product under investigation.
Furthermore, there is no procedural requirement in Article 14(5a) or elsewhere in the basic Regulation to consult importers or other parties before registration takes place.
The requirement laid down in Article 10(4)(b) of the basic Regulation that parties be given an opportunity to comment only applies when there is a decision to collect duties retroactively after registering, but not for the registration itself.
This is clearly from the fact that Article 14(5a) of the basic Regulation only refers to points (c) and (d) of Article 10(4) that need to be fulfilled for registration under this provision, but it deliberately does not refer to point (b) of Article 10(4).
This is in line with the effect of such registration discussed above.
Therefore, the Commission is not under the obligation to give the importers an opportunity to comment before instructing customs authorities to register imports.
Therefore, the claim was rejected.
(4) Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/934 of 16 June 2022 making imports of certain aluminium road wheels originating in Morocco subject to registration (OJ L 162, 17.6.2022, p. 27).
(5) Order of 28 September 2021, Airoldi Metalli SpA, T-611/20, EU:T:2021:641, paras 48 and 49.