CELEX: 62020TN0687
Language: en
Date: 2020-11-16 00:00:00
Title: Case T-687/20: Action brought on 16 November 2020 — Jinan Meide Casting and Others v Commission

18.1.2021   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 19/68
            
         
      Action brought on 16 November 2020 — Jinan Meide Casting and Others v Commission
      (Case T-687/20)
      (2021/C 19/74)
      Language of the case: English
      
         Parties
      
      
         Applicants: Jinan Meide Casting Co. Ltd (Jinan, China) and 10 other applicants (represented by: R. Antonini, E. Monard and B. Maniatis, lawyers)
      
         Defendant: European Commission
      
         Form of order sought
      
      The applicants claim that the Court should:
      
                  —
               
               
                  annul Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/1210 of 19 August 2020 reimposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of threaded tube or pipe cast fittings, of malleable cast iron and spheroidal graphite cast iron, originating in the People’s Republic of China, manufactured by Jinan Meide Castings Co., Ltd following the judgment of the General Court in case T-650/17 (1); and
               
            
                  —
               
               
                  order the European Commission to bear the costs of these proceedings.
               
            
         Pleas in law and main arguments
      
      In support of the action, the applicants rely on seven pleas in law.
      
                  1.
               
               
                  First plea in law, alleging a violation of Article 10(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009, of 30 November 2009, on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (2) (the ‘basic Regulation’) and the general principle of non-retroactivity. The applicants claim that, pursuant to Article 10(1) of the basic Regulation, since contested Regulation entered into force on 22 August 2020, the duties could only be applied to products that entered free circulation as from 22 August 2020. The provisions in the contested Regulation that provide for an imposition and collection of duties as of 15 May 2013 therefore allegedly violate Article 10(1) of the basic Regulation and the general principle of non-retroactivity.
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Second plea in law, alleging a violation of the general principle of non-retroactivity of Union acts and the general principle of legal certainty.
               
            
                  3.
               
               
                  Third plea in law, alleging that by adopting the contested Regulation, the Commission violated Article 266 TFEU as it failed to take the necessary measures to comply with the General Court’s judgment in Case T-650/17. In particular, by re-imposing duties as from 15 May 2013, the contested Regulation allegedly ignored that this judgment annulled Regulation (EU) 2017/1146 (3) in its entirety with respect to Jinan Meide Casting Co., Ltd. (‘JMCC’), with the effect that the duties imposed on JMCC were retroactively erased from the Union legal order.
               
            
                  4.
               
               
                  Fourth plea in law, alleging that, by imposing duties retroactively instead of opting for the less onerous option of imposing duties only for the future, the Commission went beyond what is necessary to implement the General Court’s judgment in Case T-650/17, in violation of the principle of proportionality as well as Article 5(1) and (4) TEU.
               
            
                  5.
               
               
                  Fifth plea in law, alleging that the contested Regulation violates the right to an effective remedy, which is a general principle of Union law enshrined in Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. According to the applicants, the closest effective remedy for the illegal imposition of duties on their imports was to obtain an annulment and thereby be fully reimbursed for the duties that were unduly paid.
               
            
                  6.
               
               
                  Sixth plea in law, alleging that, through the contested Regulation, the Commission is imposing a duty for a period for which such duty is time barred pursuant to Article 103 of the Union Customs Code (4), which provides for a limitation period of three years as from the date of importation to collect such duties.
               
            
                  7.
               
               
                  Seventh plea in law, alleging that the registration of imports of JMCC’s products did not provide the Commission with a ground to impose the duties retroactively in the present case. According to the applicants, the Commission also lacked competence to impose registration, and imports of JMCC’s products were made subject to registration in violation of Article 14(5) of the basic Regulation.
               
            
         (1)  OJ 2020 L 274, p. 20.
      
         (2)  OJ 2009 L 343, p. 51.
      
         (3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1146, of 28 June 2017, re-imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of threaded tube or pipe cast fittings, of malleable cast iron, originating in the People’s Republic of China, manufactured by Jinan Meide Castings Co., Ltd (OJ 2017 L 166, p. 23)
      
         (4)  Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union Customs Code (OJ 2013 L 269, p. 1).