CELEX: C2001/331/27
Language: en
Date: 2001-11-24 00:00:00
Title: Case C-404/01 P(R): Appeal brought on 12 October 2001 by the Commission of the European Communities against the order made on 1 August 2001 by the President of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities in Case T-132/01 R between Euroalliages, Péchiney Electrométallurgie, Vargon Alloys AB and Ferroatlantica, and the Commission of the European Communities

C 331/16                EN                   Official Journal of the European Communities                                     24.11.2001
The applicant claims that the Court should:                             The appellant claims that the Court should:
—     Declare that, by failing to bring into force the laws,
      regulations and administrative provisions needed in order         —     set aside the order of the President of the Court of
      to comply with Directive 97/55/EC (1) of the European                   First Instance of 1 August 2001 in Case T-132/01 R
      Parliament and of the Council of 6 October 1997                         Euroalliages and Others v Commission;
      amending Directive 84/450/EEC (2) concerning mislead-
      ing advertising so as to include comparative advertising,
      or, in any event, by failing to have informed the                 —     dismiss the application for interim measures in Case
      Commission of any such laws, regulations or administrat-                T-132/01 R; and
      ive provisions, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil
      its obligations under Article 3(1) of the Directive,
                                                                        —     order the applicants to pay the costs occasioned by this
—     Order the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.                            appeal, as well as by the application for interim relief and
                                                                              the application to amend the order of 1 August 2001.
Pleas in law and main arguments
Under Article 3(1) of the Directive, the Kingdom of Spain was           Pleas in law and main arguments
obliged to take the necessary measures to comply with the
requirements of the Directive by 23 April 2000 at the latest
and to inform the Commission thereof forthwith. However,
the Kingdom of Spain has not complied with those obligations,           —     The order misconstrued Article 3(1) of Council Regula-
since it has failed to take the measures necessary to incorporate             tion(EC) No 384/96 (1) in finding that‘ the term “material”
the Directive into the Spanish legal system.                                  can only be understood as a synonym for “serious”’. There
                                                                              is nothing in that Regulation to support the conclusion
                                                                              that a ‘material’ injury within the meaning of Article 3 of
(1) OJ L 290, 23.10.1997, p. 18 .                                             the Regulation is the same as the ‘serious’ damage which
(2) OJ L 250, 19.9.1984, p. 17.                                               must be established for the purposes of an application
                                                                              for interim measures.
                                                                        —     The order failed to have regard to the case-law on
                                                                              exceptional circumstances in finding that the circum-
                                                                              stances of this case justified departing from settled case-
                                                                              law.
Appeal brought on 12 October 2001 by the Commission
of the European Communities against the order made on
1 August 2001 by the President of the Court of First                    —     The order failed to have regard to the case-law in
Instance of the European Communities in Case T-132/01 R                       characterising the damage possibly suffered by the appli-
between Euroalliages, Péchiney Electrométallurgie, Var-                       cants as ‘irreparable’.
gon Alloys AB and Ferroatlantica, and the Commission of
                   the European Communities
                                                                        (Alternatively)
                       (Case C-404/01 P(R))
                          (2001/C 331/27)                               —     In balancing the interests at stake, the contested order:
                                                                              adopts inconsistent reasoning in finding that the regis-
An appeal against the order made on 1 August 2001 by the                      tration of imports without requiring importers to deposit
President of the Court of First Instance of the European                      guarantees would not create an irreversible situation,
Communities in Case T-132/01 R between Euroalliages,                          whereas registration with the deposit of guarantees would
Péchiney Electrométallurgie, Vargon Alloys AB and Ferroatlan-                 do so; and
tica, and the Commission of the European Communities
was brought before the Court of Justice of the European
Communities on 11 October 2001 (by fax received on                            misinterprets Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 384/96
11.10.01) by the Commission of the European Communities                       (which implements the Community’s obligations under
represented by V. Kreuschitz and S. Meany, acting as Agents,                  Article 7 of the GATT agreement on anti-dumping) in
and P. Bentley, Barrister, with an address for service in                     concluding that the registration of imports would not
Luxembourg.                                                                   have the same effect as anti-dumping measures.
 ---pagebreak--- 24.11.2001             EN                     Official Journal of the European Communities                                      C 331/17
(Alternatively)                                                                      Regulation (EC) No 384/96, that provisional anti-
                                                                                     dumping measures (and in particular, measures
—    In its operative part, the order failed to have regard to:                      requiring registration) may not last for more than
     (1) the principle, in Article 7(1) of Regulation 384/96,                        nine months.
           which states that provisional anti-dumping duties
           are to be imposed no earlier than 60 days from the
           initiation of proceedings; and                                (1) Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on
                                                                             protection against dumped imports from countries not members
     (2) the principle, in Article 7(7) and Article 14(5) of                 of the European Community (OJ 1996 L 56, p. 1).