mizuumi1/LegalViz huggingface dataset:
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Tibor-Trans Fuvarozó és Kereskedelmi Kft. v DAF TRUCKS N.V.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Győri Ítélőtábla.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Special jurisdiction — Article 7(2) — Tort, delict or quasi-delict — Place where the harmful event occurred — Claim for compensation for damage caused by a cartel found to be contrary to Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area.
Case C-451/18. (2019)
Language: Hungarian

2018. április 19‑i határozatával a Győri Törvényszék megállapította, hogy nincs joghatósága az alapügy elbírálására, és az 1215/2012 rendelet 7. cikke 2. pontjának alkalmazása szempontjából kapcsolóelvként a kárt okozó esemény bekövetkezésének helyét tartotta szem előtt, vagyis azt a helyet, ahol az összejátszásra irányuló megállapodások létrejöttek.
Az e határozat ellen benyújtott fellebbezés alapján eljáró kérdést előterjesztő bíróságnak kétségei vannak afelől, hogy az alapügyben analógia útján alkalmazható‑e – a felek közötti közvetlen szerződéses kapcsolat hiányában – a 2015. május 21‑iCDC Hydrogen Peroxide ítéletre (C‑352/13, EU:C:2015:335) alapított érvelés. Továbbá kétségét fejezi ki azzal kapcsolatban, hogy az említett ítélet a gyakorlatban egy tág forum actoris szabály létrehozását eredményezheti, ami ellentétes az 1215/2012 rendelet által követett céllal.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Tibor-Trans"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "The Győri Törvényszék (Győr Court)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "1215/2012 rendelet 7. cikke 2. pontjának alkalmazása szempontjából 1215/2012"[shape=trapezium];
  "előterjesztő bíróság"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "The Győri Törvényszék (Győr Court)"->"határozat 19/04/2018";
  "határozat 19/04/2018"->"Tibor-Trans";
  "határozat 19/04/2018"->"nincs joghatósága az alapügy elbírálására."[dir=none];
  "nincs joghatósága az alapügy elbírálására."->"1215/2012 rendelet 7. cikke 2. pontjának alkalmazása szempontjából 1215/2012"[dir=none];
  "határozat 19/04/2018"->"előterjesztő bíróság"[label="fellebbezés"];
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Tibor-Trans Fuvarozó és Kereskedelmi Kft. v DAF TRUCKS N.V.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Győri Ítélőtábla.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Special jurisdiction — Article 7(2) — Tort, delict or quasi-delict — Place where the harmful event occurred — Claim for compensation for damage caused by a cartel found to be contrary to Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area.
Case C-451/18. (2019)
Language: Maltese

Permezz ta’ deċiżjoni tad-19 ta’ April 2018, il-Győri Törvényszék (il-Qorti ta’ Győr) ikkonstatat li hija ma għandhiex ġurisdizzjoni sabiex tieħu konjizzjoni tal-kawża prinċipali, billi ffavorixxiet, bħala kriterju ta’ konnessjoni għall-finijiet tal-applikazzjoni tal-punt 2 tal-Artikolu 7 tar-Regolament Nru 1215/2012, il-post li fih seħħ il-fatt li kkawża d-dannu, jiġifieri l-post fejn kienu stabbiliti l-arranġamenti kollużivi.
Adita b’appell kontra din id-deċiżjoni, il-qorti tar-rinviju għandha dubju dwar il-possibbiltà li tapplika, b’analoġija, fil-kawża prinċipali, fl-assenza ta’ rabta kuntrattwali diretta bejn il-partijiet, ir-raġunament ibbażat fuq is-sentenza tal-21 ta’ Mejju 2015, CDC Hydrogen Peroxide (C‑352/13, EU:C:2015:335). Hija tirreferi wkoll għar-riżervi dwar il-possibbiltà li l-imsemmija sentenza tista’ twassal għall-istabbiliment ta’ regola tal-forum actoris ikkonċepita b’mod wiesa’, li jmur kontra l-għan imfittex mir-Regolament Nru 1215/2012.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Tibor-Trans"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "The Győri Törvényszék (Győr Court)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "1215/2012 1215/2012"[shape=trapezium];
  "il-qorti tar-rinviju"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "The Győri Törvényszék (Győr Court)"->"deċiżjoni 19/04/2018";
  "deċiżjoni 19/04/2018"->"Tibor-Trans";
  "deċiżjoni 19/04/2018"->"hija ma għandhiex ġurisdizzjoni sabiex tieħu konjizzjoni tal-kawża prinċipali."[dir=none];
  "hija ma għandhiex ġurisdizzjoni sabiex tieħu konjizzjoni tal-kawża prinċipali."->"1215/2012 1215/2012"[dir=none];
  "deċiżjoni 19/04/2018"->"il-qorti tar-rinviju"[label="appell"];
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Tibor-Trans Fuvarozó és Kereskedelmi Kft. v DAF TRUCKS N.V.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Győri Ítélőtábla.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Special jurisdiction — Article 7(2) — Tort, delict or quasi-delict — Place where the harmful event occurred — Claim for compensation for damage caused by a cartel found to be contrary to Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area.
Case C-451/18. (2019)
Language: Dutch

Bij beslissing van 19 april 2018 heeft de Győri Törvényszék zich onbevoegd verklaard om kennis te nemen van het hoofdgeding omdat volgens deze rechter de plaats van de schadeveroorzakende gebeurtenis, dus de plaats waar de heimelijke afspraken werden gemaakt, het aanknopingspunt voor de toepassing van artikel 7, punt 2, van verordening nr. 1215/2012 was.
De verwijzende rechter, bij wie hoger beroep is ingesteld tegen deze beslissing, twijfelt of hij, bij gebrek aan een rechtstreekse contractuele band tussen de partijen, de aan het arrest van 21 mei 2015, CDC Hydrogen Peroxide (C‑352/13, EU:C:2015:335), ontleende redenering naar analogie kan toepassen in het hoofdgeding. Hij uit tevens bedenkingen omdat het genoemde arrest kan leiden tot een ruim opgezette forum-actorisregel die in strijd zou zijn met de door verordening nr. 1215/2012 nagestreefde doelstelling.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Tibor-Trans"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "The Győri Törvényszék (Győr Court)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "1215/2012 was het aanknopingspunt voor de toepassing van artikel 7, punt 2, van verordening nr. 1215/2012 1215/2012"[shape=trapezium];
  "De verwijzende rechter"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "The Győri Törvényszék (Győr Court)"->"beslissing van 19 april 2018 19/04/2018";
  "beslissing van 19 april 2018 19/04/2018"->"Tibor-Trans";
  "beslissing van 19 april 2018 19/04/2018"->"Bij beslissing van 19 april 2018 heeft de Győri Törvényszék zich onbevoegd verklaard om kennis te nemen van het hoofdgeding."[dir=none];
  "Bij beslissing van 19 april 2018 heeft de Győri Törvényszék zich onbevoegd verklaard om kennis te nemen van het hoofdgeding."->"1215/2012 was het aanknopingspunt voor de toepassing van artikel 7, punt 2, van verordening nr. 1215/2012 1215/2012"[dir=none];
  "beslissing van 19 april 2018 19/04/2018"->"De verwijzende rechter"[label="hoger beroep"];
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Tibor-Trans Fuvarozó és Kereskedelmi Kft. v DAF TRUCKS N.V.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Győri Ítélőtábla.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Special jurisdiction — Article 7(2) — Tort, delict or quasi-delict — Place where the harmful event occurred — Claim for compensation for damage caused by a cartel found to be contrary to Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area.
Case C-451/18. (2019)
Language: Portuguese

Por Decisão de 19 de abril de 2018, o Győri Törvényszék (Tribunal de Győr) declarou não ser competente para conhecer do processo principal, privilegiando, como critério de conexão para efeitos da aplicação do artigo 7.o, ponto 2, do Regulamento n.o 1215/2012, o lugar do evento causal que está na origem do dano, a saber, o lugar onde os acordos colusórios foram celebrados.
Chamado a conhecer do recurso dessa decisão, o órgão jurisdicional de reenvio tem dúvidas quanto à aplicabilidade, por analogia, no processo principal, na falta de um vínculo contratual direto entre as partes, do raciocínio resultante do Acórdão de 21 de maio de 2015, CDC Hydrogen Peroxide (C‑352/13, EU:C:2015:335). Exprime igualmente reservas a respeito da possibilidade de o referido acórdão poder conduzir ao estabelecimento de uma regra de forum actoris em sentido amplo, o que seria contrário ao objetivo prosseguido pelo Regulamento n.o 1215/2012.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Tibor-Trans"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "The Győri Törvényszék (Győr Court)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "aplicação do artigo 7.o, ponto 2, do Regulamento n.o 1215/2012 1215/2012"[shape=trapezium];
  "o órgão jurisdicional de reenvio"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "The Győri Törvényszék (Győr Court)"->"Decisão de 19 de abril de 2018 19/04/2018";
  "Decisão de 19 de abril de 2018 19/04/2018"->"Tibor-Trans";
  "Decisão de 19 de abril de 2018 19/04/2018"->"declarou não ser competente para conhecer do processo principal."[dir=none];
  "declarou não ser competente para conhecer do processo principal."->"aplicação do artigo 7.o, ponto 2, do Regulamento n.o 1215/2012 1215/2012"[dir=none];
  "Decisão de 19 de abril de 2018 19/04/2018"->"o órgão jurisdicional de reenvio"[label="recurso"];
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Tibor-Trans Fuvarozó és Kereskedelmi Kft. v DAF TRUCKS N.V.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Győri Ítélőtábla.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Special jurisdiction — Article 7(2) — Tort, delict or quasi-delict — Place where the harmful event occurred — Claim for compensation for damage caused by a cartel found to be contrary to Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area.
Case C-451/18. (2019)
Language: Romanian

Prin Decizia din 19 aprilie 2018, Győri Törvényszék (Curtea din Győr) a constatat că nu este competentă să soluționeze cauza principală, privilegiind, ca punct de legătură în scopul aplicării articolului 7 punctul 2 din Regulamentul nr. 1215/2012, locul unde s‑a produs evenimentul cauzator al prejudiciului, și anume locul în care au fost încheiate acordurile coluzive.
Sesizată cu un apel împotriva acestei decizii, instanța de trimitere exprimă îndoieli cu privire la posibilitatea de a aplica prin analogie în cauza principală, în lipsa unei legături contractuale directe între părți, raționamentul întemeiat pe Hotărârea din 21 mai 2015, CDC Hydrogen Peroxide (C‑352/13, EU:C:2015:335). Aceasta exprimă și rezerve cu privire la posibilitatea ca hotărârea menționată să conducă la stabilirea unei norme a forum actoris în sens larg, ceea ce ar fi contrar obiectivului urmărit prin Regulamentul nr. 1215/2012.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Tibor-Trans"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "The Győri Törvényszék (Győr Court)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "scopul aplicării articolului 7 punctul 2 din Regulamentul nr. 1215/2012 1215/2012"[shape=trapezium];
  "instanța de trimitere"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "The Győri Törvényszék (Győr Court)"->"Decizia 19/04/2018";
  "Decizia 19/04/2018"->"Tibor-Trans";
  "Decizia 19/04/2018"->"nu este competentă să soluționeze cauza principală."[dir=none];
  "nu este competentă să soluționeze cauza principală."->"scopul aplicării articolului 7 punctul 2 din Regulamentul nr. 1215/2012 1215/2012"[dir=none];
  "Decizia 19/04/2018"->"instanța de trimitere"[label="apel"];
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Tibor-Trans Fuvarozó és Kereskedelmi Kft. v DAF TRUCKS N.V.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Győri Ítélőtábla.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Special jurisdiction — Article 7(2) — Tort, delict or quasi-delict — Place where the harmful event occurred — Claim for compensation for damage caused by a cartel found to be contrary to Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area.
Case C-451/18. (2019)
Language: Slovak

Rozhodnutím z 19. apríla 2018 Győri Törvényszék (súd v Győri) konštatoval, že nemá právomoc rozhodnúť vo veci samej, pričom ako hraničný ukazovateľ na účely uplatnenia článku 7 bodu 2 nariadenia č. 1215/2012 uprednostnil miesto, kde došlo k príčinnej udalosti, ktorá viedla k vzniku škody, teda miesto, kde sa uzavreli tajné dohody.
Vnútroštátny súd, ktorý rozhoduje o odvolaní proti tomuto rozhodnutiu, má pochybnosti o možnosti uplatniť vo veci samej analogicky odôvodnenie pochádzajúce z rozsudku z 21. mája 2015, CDC Hydrogen Peroxide (C‑352/13, EU:C:2015:335), keď medzi účastníkmi konania neexistuje priamy zmluvný vzťah. Rovnako opakuje výhrady týkajúce sa možnosti, že uvedený rozsudok by mohol viesť k rozšíreniu poňatia pravidla forum actoris, čo by bolo v rozpore s cieľom sledovaným nariadením č. 1215/2012.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Tibor-Trans"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "The Győri Törvényszék (Győr Court)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "účely uplatnenia článku 7 bodu 2 nariadenia č. 1215/2012 1215/2012"[shape=trapezium];
  "Vnútroštátny súd"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "The Győri Törvényszék (Győr Court)"->"Rozhodnutím z 19. apríla 2018 Győri Törvényszék 19/04/2018";
  "Rozhodnutím z 19. apríla 2018 Győri Törvényszék 19/04/2018"->"Tibor-Trans";
  "Rozhodnutím z 19. apríla 2018 Győri Törvényszék 19/04/2018"->"že nemá právomoc rozhodnúť vo veci samej."[dir=none];
  "že nemá právomoc rozhodnúť vo veci samej."->"účely uplatnenia článku 7 bodu 2 nariadenia č. 1215/2012 1215/2012"[dir=none];
  "Rozhodnutím z 19. apríla 2018 Győri Törvényszék 19/04/2018"->"Vnútroštátny súd"[label="odvolaní"];
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Tibor-Trans Fuvarozó és Kereskedelmi Kft. v DAF TRUCKS N.V.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Győri Ítélőtábla.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Special jurisdiction — Article 7(2) — Tort, delict or quasi-delict — Place where the harmful event occurred — Claim for compensation for damage caused by a cartel found to be contrary to Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area.
Case C-451/18. (2019)
Language: Slovenian

Győri Törvényszék (sodišče v Győru) je s sklepom z dne 19. aprila 2018 ugotovilo, da ni pristojno za odločanje o zadevi v glavni stvari, s čimer je kot navezno okoliščino za uporabo člena 7, točka 2, Uredbe št. 1215/2012 privilegiralo kraj vzročnega dogodka, ki je bil povod za škodo, in sicer kraj, v katerem so potekali tajni dogovori.
Predložitveno sodišče, ki odloča o pritožbi zoper ta sklep, dvomi, da je mogoče v postopku v glavni stvari po analogiji uporabiti razlogovanje, ki izhaja iz sodbe z dne 21. maja 2015, CDC Hydrogen Peroxide (C‑352/13, EU:C:2015:335), ker med strankami ni neposrednega pogodbenega razmerja. Prav tako se sklicuje na pridržke v zvezi z možnostjo, da lahko navedena sodba privede do vzpostavitve širokega pravila forum actoris, kar bi bilo v nasprotju s ciljem, ki mu sledi Uredba št. 1215/2012.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Tibor-Trans"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "The Győri Törvényszék (Győr Court)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Uredbe št. 1215/2012 privilegiralo kraj vzročnega dogodka, ki je bil povod za škodo 1215/2012"[shape=trapezium];
  "Predložitveno sodišče"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "The Győri Törvényszék (Győr Court)"->"sklep 19/04/2018";
  "sklep 19/04/2018"->"Tibor-Trans";
  "sklep 19/04/2018"->"da ni pristojno za odločanje o zadevi v glavni stvari."[dir=none];
  "da ni pristojno za odločanje o zadevi v glavni stvari."->"Uredbe št. 1215/2012 privilegiralo kraj vzročnega dogodka, ki je bil povod za škodo 1215/2012"[dir=none];
  "sklep 19/04/2018"->"Predložitveno sodišče"[label="pritožbi"];
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Tibor-Trans Fuvarozó és Kereskedelmi Kft. v DAF TRUCKS N.V.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Győri Ítélőtábla.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Special jurisdiction — Article 7(2) — Tort, delict or quasi-delict — Place where the harmful event occurred — Claim for compensation for damage caused by a cartel found to be contrary to Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area.
Case C-451/18. (2019)
Language: Finnish

Győri Törvényszék totesi 19.4.2018 antamallaan päätöksellä, ettei sillä ole toimivaltaa tutkia pääasiaa, koska asetuksen N:o 1215/2012 7 artiklan 2 alakohdan soveltamisen kannalta liittymäperusteena on pidettävä sitä paikkaa, jossa vahingon aiheuttanut kausaaliyhteydessä oleva tapahtuma sattui, eli salaisten yhteistoimintajärjestelyjen toteuttamispaikkaa.
Ennakkoratkaisua pyytänyt tuomioistuin, jolle on valitettu tästä päätöksestä, epäilee sitä, voidaanko pääasiassa soveltaa analogisesti 21.5.2015 annetun tuomion CDC Hydrogen Peroxide (C‑352/13, EU:C:2015:335) mukaista päättelyä, koska asianosaisten välillä ei ole suoraa sopimussuhdetta. Se esittää myös varaumia siitä mahdollisuudesta, että kyseinen tuomio voisi johtaa forum actoris ‑säännön vakiintumiseen, mikä olisi asetuksen N:o 1215/2012 tavoitteen vastaista.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Tibor-Trans"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "The Győri Törvényszék (Győr Court)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "1215/2012 7 artiklan 2 alakohdan soveltamisen kannalta liittymäperusteena on pidettävä sitä paikkaa, jossa vahingon aiheuttanut kausaaliyhteydessä oleva tapahtuma sattui 1215/2012"[shape=trapezium];
  "Ennakkoratkaisua pyytänyt tuomioistuin"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "The Győri Törvényszék (Győr Court)"->"päätöksellä 19/04/2018";
  "päätöksellä 19/04/2018"->"Tibor-Trans";
  "päätöksellä 19/04/2018"->"Győri Törvényszék totesi 19.4.2018 antamallaan päätöksellä, ettei sillä ole toimivaltaa tutkia pääasiaa."[dir=none];
  "Győri Törvényszék totesi 19.4.2018 antamallaan päätöksellä, ettei sillä ole toimivaltaa tutkia pääasiaa."->"1215/2012 7 artiklan 2 alakohdan soveltamisen kannalta liittymäperusteena on pidettävä sitä paikkaa, jossa vahingon aiheuttanut kausaaliyhteydessä oleva tapahtuma sattui 1215/2012"[dir=none];
  "päätöksellä 19/04/2018"->"Ennakkoratkaisua pyytänyt tuomioistuin"[label="valitettu"];
}
Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Tibor-Trans Fuvarozó és Kereskedelmi Kft. v DAF TRUCKS N.V.
Request for a preliminary ruling from the Győri Ítélőtábla.
Reference for a preliminary ruling — Judicial cooperation in civil matters — Regulation (EU) No 1215/2012 — Special jurisdiction — Article 7(2) — Tort, delict or quasi-delict — Place where the harmful event occurred — Claim for compensation for damage caused by a cartel found to be contrary to Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area.
Case C-451/18. (2019)
Language: Swedish

Genom beslut av den 19 april 2018 konstaterade Győri Törvényszék (domstolen i Györ) att den inte var behörig att pröva det nationella målet och utpekade som anknytningskriterium för tillämpningen av artikel 7 led 2 i förordning nr 1215/2012 den ort där den skadevållande händelsen inträffade, det vill säga den ort där den hemliga samverkan hade ägt rum.
Den hänskjutande domstolen, till vilken nämnda beslut överklagades, betvivlar möjligheten att i det nationella målet – då det inte föreligger ett direkt avtalsförhållande mellan parterna – tillämpa resonemanget i dom av den 21 maj 2015, CDC Hydrogen Peroxide (C‑352/13, EU:C:2015:335) analogt. Den hänskjutande domstolen hyser även tvivel vad beträffar möjligheten att denna dom skulle kunna läggas till grund för införandet av en regel om forum actoris i vid bemärkelse, vilket skulle strida mot syftet med förordning nr 1215/2012.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Tibor-Trans"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "The Győri Törvényszék (Győr Court)"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "tillämpningen av artikel 7 led 2 i förordning nr 1215/2012 1215/2012"[shape=trapezium];
  "Den hänskjutande domstolen"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "The Győri Törvényszék (Győr Court)"->"beslut av den 19 april 2018 19/04/2018";
  "beslut av den 19 april 2018 19/04/2018"->"Tibor-Trans";
  "beslut av den 19 april 2018 19/04/2018"->"den inte var behörig att pröva det nationella målet."[dir=none];
  "den inte var behörig att pröva det nationella målet."->"tillämpningen av artikel 7 led 2 i förordning nr 1215/2012 1215/2012"[dir=none];
  "beslut av den 19 april 2018 19/04/2018"->"Den hänskjutande domstolen"[label="överklagades"];
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission.
Appeal — Dumping — Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain products originating in China — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1429 — Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Article 2(7)(a) — Normal value — Determination on the basis of the price in a market economy third country — Selection of the appropriate third country — Market economy third country which is subject to the same investigation — Adjustments.
Case C-436/18 P. (2019)
Language: English

By application lodged at the Registry of the General Court on 20 November 2015, the appellant brought an action for partial annulment of the regulation at issue.
By order of 19 July 2016, the President of the First Chamber of the General Court granted Eurofer leave to intervene in support of the form of order sought by the Commission.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
   "The General Court"[shape=doubleoctagon];
   "The appellant"[shape=doubleoctagon];
   "Eurofer"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
   "The appellant"->"Application 20/11/2015";
   "Application 20/11/2015"->"The General Court";
   "Application 20/11/2015"->"Partial annulment of the regulation"[dir=none];
   "The General Court"->"Order 19/07/2016";
   "Order 19/07/2016"->"Eurofer";
   "Order 19/07/2016"->"Granted to intervene in support of the form of order sought by the Commission."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission.
Appeal — Dumping — Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain products originating in China — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1429 — Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Article 2(7)(a) — Normal value — Determination on the basis of the price in a market economy third country — Selection of the appropriate third country — Market economy third country which is subject to the same investigation — Adjustments.
Case C-436/18 P. (2019)
Language: Bulgarian

Жалбоподателят е дружество, установено в Китай, което основно извършва дейност на пазара за производство и разпространение на продукти от стомана, по-специално студеновалцувани плоски продукти от неръждаеми стомани.
След подадена на 13 май 2014 г. жалба от Eurofer, Association européenne de l’acier, ASBL (наричана по-нататък „Eurofer“), на 26 юни 2014 г. Европейската комисия публикува Известие за започване на антидъмпингова процедура по отношение на вноса на студеновалцувани плоски продукти от неръждаеми стомани с произход от Китайската народна република и Тайван (ОВ C 196, 2014 г., стр. 9).

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Общият съд"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Жалбоподателят"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Eurofer"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "Жалбоподателят"->"жалба 20/11/2015";
  "жалба 20/11/2015"->"Общият съд";
  "жалба 20/11/2015"->"Частична отмяна на регламента"[dir=none];
  "Общият съд"->"Поръчка 19/07/2016";
  "Поръчка 19/07/2016"->"Eurofer";
  "Поръчка 19/07/2016"->"Разрешава се встъпване в подкрепа на исканията на Комисията.."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission.
Appeal — Dumping — Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain products originating in China — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1429 — Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Article 2(7)(a) — Normal value — Determination on the basis of the price in a market economy third country — Selection of the appropriate third country — Market economy third country which is subject to the same investigation — Adjustments.
Case C-436/18 P. (2019)
Language: Spanish

La recurrente es una sociedad domiciliada en China que se dedica principalmente a la fabricación y a la distribución de productos de acero, en particular de productos planos de acero inoxidable laminados en frío.
A raíz de una denuncia presentada el 13 de mayo de 2014 por Eurofer, Association européenne de l’acier, ASBL (en lo sucesivo, «Eurofer»), la Comisión Europea publicó, el 26 de junio de 2014, un anuncio de inicio de un procedimiento antidumping relativo a las importaciones de productos planos de acero inoxidable laminados en frío originarios de la República Popular China y Taiwán (DO 2014, C 196, p. 9).

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "El Tribunal General"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "La recurrente"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Eurofer"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "La recurrente"->"denuncia presentada el 13 de mayo de 2014 por Eurofer, Association européenne de l’acier, ASBL 20/11/2015";
  "denuncia presentada el 13 de mayo de 2014 por Eurofer, Association européenne de l’acier, ASBL 20/11/2015"->"El Tribunal General";
  "denuncia presentada el 13 de mayo de 2014 por Eurofer, Association européenne de l’acier, ASBL 20/11/2015"->"Anulación parcial del Reglamento"[dir=none];
  "El Tribunal General"->"Encargar 19/07/2016";
  "Encargar 19/07/2016"->"Eurofer";
  "Encargar 19/07/2016"->"Concedida para intervenir en apoyo de las pretensiones de la Comisión.."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission.
Appeal — Dumping — Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain products originating in China — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1429 — Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Article 2(7)(a) — Normal value — Determination on the basis of the price in a market economy third country — Selection of the appropriate third country — Market economy third country which is subject to the same investigation — Adjustments.
Case C-436/18 P. (2019)
Language: Czech

Návrhem došlým kanceláři Tribunálu dne 20. listopadu 2015 podala navrhovatelka žalobu znějící na částečně zrušení sporného nařízení.
Usnesením ze dne 19. července 2016 předseda prvního senátu Tribunálu povolil sdružení Eurofer vedlejší účastenství na podporu návrhových žádání Komise.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Tribunálu"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "navrhovatelka"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Eurofer"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "navrhovatelka"->"Návrhem 20/11/2015";
  "Návrhem 20/11/2015"->"Tribunálu";
  "Návrhem 20/11/2015"->"částečně zrušení sporného nařízení"[dir=none];
  "Tribunálu"->"Usnesením 19/07/2016";
  "Usnesením 19/07/2016"->"Eurofer";
  "Usnesením 19/07/2016"->"povolil sdružení Eurofer vedlejší účastenství na podporu návrhových žádání Komise.."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission.
Appeal — Dumping — Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain products originating in China — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1429 — Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Article 2(7)(a) — Normal value — Determination on the basis of the price in a market economy third country — Selection of the appropriate third country — Market economy third country which is subject to the same investigation — Adjustments.
Case C-436/18 P. (2019)
Language: Danish

Ved stævning indleveret til Rettens Justitskontor den 20. november 2015 anlagde appellanten sag med påstand om delvis annullation af den omtvistede forordning.
Ved kendelse af 19. juli 2016 gav formanden for Rettens Første Afdeling Eurofer tilladelse til at indtræde i sagen til støtte for Kommissionens påstande.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Rettens"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "appellanten"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Eurofer"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "appellanten"->"stævning 20/11/2015";
  "stævning 20/11/2015"->"Rettens";
  "stævning 20/11/2015"->"delvis annullation af den omtvistede forordning."[dir=none];
  "Rettens"->"kendelse 19/07/2016";
  "kendelse 19/07/2016"->"Eurofer";
  "kendelse 19/07/2016"->"gav formanden for Rettens Første Afdeling Eurofer tilladelse til at indtræde i sagen til støtte for Kommissionens påstande.."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission.
Appeal — Dumping — Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain products originating in China — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1429 — Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Article 2(7)(a) — Normal value — Determination on the basis of the price in a market economy third country — Selection of the appropriate third country — Market economy third country which is subject to the same investigation — Adjustments.
Case C-436/18 P. (2019)
Language: German

Mit Klageschrift, die am 20. November 2015 bei der Kanzlei des Gerichts einging, erhob die Rechtsmittelführerin Klage auf teilweise Nichtigkeit der streitigen Verordnung.
Mit Beschluss des Präsidenten der Ersten Kammer des Gerichts vom 19. Juli 2016 wurde Eurofer als Streithelferin zur Unterstützung der Anträge der Kommission zugelassen.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "des Gerichts"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "die Rechtsmittelführerin"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Eurofer"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "die Rechtsmittelführerin"->"Anträge 20/11/2015";
  "Anträge 20/11/2015"->"des Gerichts";
  "Anträge 20/11/2015"->"teilweise Nichtigkeit der streitigen Verordnung"[dir=none];
  "des Gerichts"->"Beschluss 19/07/2016";
  "Beschluss 19/07/2016"->"Eurofer";
  "Beschluss 19/07/2016"->"Mit Beschluss des Präsidenten der Ersten Kammer des Gerichts vom 19. Juli 2016 wurde Eurofer als Streithelferin zur Unterstützung der Anträge der Kommission zugelassen.."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission.
Appeal — Dumping — Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain products originating in China — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1429 — Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Article 2(7)(a) — Normal value — Determination on the basis of the price in a market economy third country — Selection of the appropriate third country — Market economy third country which is subject to the same investigation — Adjustments.
Case C-436/18 P. (2019)
Language: Estonian

Apellant esitas vaidlustatud määruse osalise tühistamise nõudes hagi, mis saabus Üldkohtu kantseleisse 20. novembril 2015.
Üldkohtu esimese koja presidendi 19. juuli 2016. aasta määrusega anti Euroferile luba astuda menetlusse komisjoni nõuete toetuseks.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Üldkohus"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Apellant"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Eurofer"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "Apellant"->"hagi 20/11/2015";
  "hagi 20/11/2015"->"Üldkohus";
  "hagi 20/11/2015"->"osalise tühistamise nõudes"[dir=none];
  "Üldkohus"->"määrus 19/07/2016";
  "määrus 19/07/2016"->"Eurofer";
  "määrus 19/07/2016"->"Anti Euroferile luba astuda menetlusse komisjoni nõuete toetuseks.."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission.
Appeal — Dumping — Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain products originating in China — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1429 — Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Article 2(7)(a) — Normal value — Determination on the basis of the price in a market economy third country — Selection of the appropriate third country — Market economy third country which is subject to the same investigation — Adjustments.
Case C-436/18 P. (2019)
Language: Greek

Με δικόγραφο που κατέθεσε στις 20 Νοεμβρίου 2015 στη Γραμματεία του Γενικού Δικαστηρίου η αναιρεσείουσα άσκησε προσφυγή με αίτημα τη μερική ακύρωση του επίδικου κανονισμού.
Με διάταξη της 19ης Ιουλίου 2016 ο πρόεδρος του πρώτου τμήματος του Γενικού Δικαστηρίου επέτρεψε στη Eurofer να παρέμβει υπέρ της Επιτροπής.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Γενικού Δικαστηρίου"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "η αναιρεσείουσα"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Eurofer"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "η αναιρεσείουσα"->"προσφυγή 20/11/2015";
  "προσφυγή 20/11/2015"->"Γενικού Δικαστηρίου";
  "προσφυγή 20/11/2015"->"τη μερική ακύρωση του επίδικου κανονισμού"[dir=none];
  "Γενικού Δικαστηρίου"->"διάταξη 19/07/2016";
  "διάταξη 19/07/2016"->"Eurofer";
  "διάταξη 19/07/2016"->"επέτρεψε στη Eurofer να παρέμβει υπέρ της Επιτροπής.."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission.
Appeal — Dumping — Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain products originating in China — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1429 — Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Article 2(7)(a) — Normal value — Determination on the basis of the price in a market economy third country — Selection of the appropriate third country — Market economy third country which is subject to the same investigation — Adjustments.
Case C-436/18 P. (2019)
Language: French

Par requête déposée au greffe du Tribunal le 20 novembre 2015, la requérante a introduit un recours tendant à l’annulation partielle du règlement litigieux.
Par ordonnance du 19 juillet 2016, le président de la première chambre du Tribunal a autorisé Eurofer à intervenir au soutien des conclusions de la Commission.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "le Tribunal"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "la requérante"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Eurofer"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "la requérante"->"requête déposée au greffe du Tribunal 20/11/2015";
  "requête déposée au greffe du Tribunal 20/11/2015"->"le Tribunal";
  "requête déposée au greffe du Tribunal 20/11/2015"->"l’annulation partielle du règlement"[dir=none];
  "le Tribunal"->"ordonnance du 19 juillet 2016 19/07/2016";
  "ordonnance du 19 juillet 2016 19/07/2016"->"Eurofer";
  "ordonnance du 19 juillet 2016 19/07/2016"->"a autorisé Eurofer à intervenir au soutien des conclusions de la Commission.."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission.
Appeal — Dumping — Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain products originating in China — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1429 — Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Article 2(7)(a) — Normal value — Determination on the basis of the price in a market economy third country — Selection of the appropriate third country — Market economy third country which is subject to the same investigation — Adjustments.
Case C-436/18 P. (2019)
Language: Croatian

Tužbom podnesenom tajništvu Općeg suda 20. studenoga 2015. žalitelj je pokrenuo postupak radi djelomičnog poništenja sporne uredbe.
Rješenjem od 19. srpnja 2016. predsjednik prvog vijeća Općeg suda odobrio je intervenciju Eurofera u potporu Komisijinim zahtjevima.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Općeg suda"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "žalitelj"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Eurofer"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "žalitelj"->"Tužbom 20/11/2015";
  "Tužbom 20/11/2015"->"Općeg suda";
  "Tužbom 20/11/2015"->"djelomičnog poništenja sporne uredbe"[dir=none];
  "Općeg suda"->"Rješenjem od 19. srpnja 2016. 19/07/2016";
  "Rješenjem od 19. srpnja 2016. 19/07/2016"->"Eurofer";
  "Rješenjem od 19. srpnja 2016. 19/07/2016"->"odobrio je intervenciju Eurofera u potporu Komisijinim zahtjevima.."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission.
Appeal — Dumping — Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain products originating in China — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1429 — Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Article 2(7)(a) — Normal value — Determination on the basis of the price in a market economy third country — Selection of the appropriate third country — Market economy third country which is subject to the same investigation — Adjustments.
Case C-436/18 P. (2019)
Language: Italian

Con atto introduttivo depositato presso la cancelleria del Tribunale il 20 novembre 2015, la ricorrente ha proposto un ricorso diretto all’annullamento parziale del regolamento controverso.
Con ordinanza del 19 luglio 2016, il presidente della Prima Sezione del Tribunale ha autorizzato la Eurofer a intervenire a sostegno delle conclusioni della Commissione.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Tribunale"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "la ricorrente"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Eurofer"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "la ricorrente"->"un ricorso 20/11/2015";
  "un ricorso 20/11/2015"->"Tribunale";
  "un ricorso 20/11/2015"->"annullamento parziale del regolamento"[dir=none];
  "Tribunale"->"ordinanza 19/07/2016";
  "ordinanza 19/07/2016"->"Eurofer";
  "ordinanza 19/07/2016"->"ha autorizzato la Eurofer a intervenire a sostegno delle conclusioni della Commissione.."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission.
Appeal — Dumping — Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain products originating in China — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1429 — Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Article 2(7)(a) — Normal value — Determination on the basis of the price in a market economy third country — Selection of the appropriate third country — Market economy third country which is subject to the same investigation — Adjustments.
Case C-436/18 P. (2019)
Language: Latvian

Ar prasības pieteikumu, kas Vispārējās tiesas kancelejā iesniegts 2015. gada 20. novembrī, prasītāja cēla prasību, lūdzot daļēji atcelt strīdīgo regulu.
Ar 2016. gada 19. jūlija rīkojumu Vispārējās tiesas pirmās palātas priekšsēdētājs atļāva Eurofer iestāties lietā Komisijas prasījumu atbalstam.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Vispārējās tiesas"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "prasītāja"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Eurofer"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "prasītāja"->"prasības pieteikumu 20/11/2015";
  "prasības pieteikumu 20/11/2015"->"Vispārējās tiesas";
  "prasības pieteikumu 20/11/2015"->"daļēji atcelt strīdīgo regulu."[dir=none];
  "Vispārējās tiesas"->"rīkojumu 19/07/2016";
  "rīkojumu 19/07/2016"->"Eurofer";
  "rīkojumu 19/07/2016"->"Atļāva Eurofer iestāties lietā Komisijas prasījumu atbalstam.."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission.
Appeal — Dumping — Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain products originating in China — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1429 — Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Article 2(7)(a) — Normal value — Determination on the basis of the price in a market economy third country — Selection of the appropriate third country — Market economy third country which is subject to the same investigation — Adjustments.
Case C-436/18 P. (2019)
Language: Lithuanian

2015 m. lapkričio 20 d. Bendrojo Teismo kanceliarija gavo ieškovės ieškinį dėl ginčijamo reglamento panaikinimo iš dalies.
2016 m. liepos 19 d. nutartimi Bendrojo Teismo pirmosios kolegijos pirmininkas leido Eurofer įstoti į bylą palaikyti Komisijos reikalavimų.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Bendrojo Teismo"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "ieškovės"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Eurofer"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "ieškovės"->"ieškinys 20/11/2015";
  "ieškinys 20/11/2015"->"Bendrojo Teismo";
  "ieškinys 20/11/2015"->"ginčijamo reglamento panaikinimo iš dalies"[dir=none];
  "Bendrojo Teismo"->"nutartimi 19/07/2016";
  "nutartimi 19/07/2016"->"Eurofer";
  "nutartimi 19/07/2016"->"leido Eurofer įstoti į bylą palaikyti Komisijos reikalavimų.."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission.
Appeal — Dumping — Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain products originating in China — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1429 — Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Article 2(7)(a) — Normal value — Determination on the basis of the price in a market economy third country — Selection of the appropriate third country — Market economy third country which is subject to the same investigation — Adjustments.
Case C-436/18 P. (2019)
Language: Hungarian

A Törvényszék Hivatalához 2015. november 20‑án benyújtott keresetlevelével a fellebbező a vitatott rendelet részleges megsemmisítése iránti keresetet terjesztett elő.
A Törvényszék első tanácsának elnöke 2016. július 19‑i végzésével engedélyezte, hogy az Eurofer a Bizottság kérelmeinek támogatása végett beavatkozzon.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "A Törvényszék"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "a fellebbező"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Eurofer"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "a fellebbező"->"keresetet terjesztett elő 20/11/2015";
  "keresetet terjesztett elő 20/11/2015"->"A Törvényszék";
  "keresetet terjesztett elő 20/11/2015"->"a vitatott rendelet részleges megsemmisítése"[dir=none];
  "A Törvényszék"->"végzésével 19/07/2016";
  "végzésével 19/07/2016"->"Eurofer";
  "végzésével 19/07/2016"->"Engedélyezte, hogy az Eurofer a Bizottság kérelmeinek támogatása végett beavatkozzon.."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission.
Appeal — Dumping — Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain products originating in China — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1429 — Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Article 2(7)(a) — Normal value — Determination on the basis of the price in a market economy third country — Selection of the appropriate third country — Market economy third country which is subject to the same investigation — Adjustments.
Case C-436/18 P. (2019)
Language: Maltese

Permezz ta’ rikors ippreżentat quddiem ir-Reġistru tal-Qorti Ġenerali fl‑20 ta’ Novembru 2015, l-appellanti ppreżentat rikors għall-annullament parzjali tar-Regolament kontenzjuż.
Permezz ta’ digriet tad‑19 ta’ Lulju 2016, il-President tal-Ewwel Awla tal-Qorti Ġenerali awtorizza lil Eurofer tintervjeni insostenn tat-talbiet tal-Kummissjoni.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "Qorti Ġenerali"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "l-appellanti"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Eurofer"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "l-appellanti"->"rikors 20/11/2015";
  "rikors 20/11/2015"->"Qorti Ġenerali";
  "rikors 20/11/2015"->"annullament parzjali tar-Regolament"[dir=none];
  "Qorti Ġenerali"->"digriet 19/07/2016";
  "digriet 19/07/2016"->"Eurofer";
  "digriet 19/07/2016"->"Għoti biex jintervjeni favur il-forma ta' ordni mitluba mill-Kummissjoni.."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission.
Appeal — Dumping — Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain products originating in China — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1429 — Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Article 2(7)(a) — Normal value — Determination on the basis of the price in a market economy third country — Selection of the appropriate third country — Market economy third country which is subject to the same investigation — Adjustments.
Case C-436/18 P. (2019)
Language: Dutch

Bij verzoekschrift neergelegd ter griffie van het Gerecht op 20 november 2015, heeft rekwirante beroep ingesteld tot gedeeltelijke nietigverklaring van de litigieuze verordening.
Bij beschikking van 19 juli 2016 heeft de president van de Eerste kamer van het Gerecht Eurofer toegelaten tot interventie aan de zijde van de Commissie.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "het Gerecht"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "rekwirante"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Eurofer"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "rekwirante"->"verzoekschrift 20/11/2015";
  "verzoekschrift 20/11/2015"->"het Gerecht";
  "verzoekschrift 20/11/2015"->"gedeeltelijke nietigverklaring van de litigieuze verordening."[dir=none];
  "het Gerecht"->"beschikking 19/07/2016";
  "beschikking 19/07/2016"->"Eurofer";
  "beschikking 19/07/2016"->"Eurofer toegelaten tot interventie aan de zijde van de Commissie.."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission.
Appeal — Dumping — Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain products originating in China — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1429 — Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Article 2(7)(a) — Normal value — Determination on the basis of the price in a market economy third country — Selection of the appropriate third country — Market economy third country which is subject to the same investigation — Adjustments.
Case C-436/18 P. (2019)
Language: Polish

Pismem złożonym w sekretariacie Sądu w dniu 20 listopada 2015 r. wnosząca odwołanie wniosła skargę o stwierdzenie nieważności w części spornego rozporządzenia.
Postanowieniem z dnia 19 lipca 2016 r. prezes pierwszej izby Sądu dopuścił Eurofer do udziału w sprawie w charakterze interwenienta popierającego żądania Komisji.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "pierwszej izby Sądu"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "wnosząca odwołanie"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Eurofer"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "wnosząca odwołanie"->"wnosząca odwołanie wniosła skargę o stwierdzenie nieważności w części spornego rozporządzenia. 20/11/2015";
  "wnosząca odwołanie wniosła skargę o stwierdzenie nieważności w części spornego rozporządzenia. 20/11/2015"->"pierwszej izby Sądu";
  "wnosząca odwołanie wniosła skargę o stwierdzenie nieważności w części spornego rozporządzenia. 20/11/2015"->"stwierdzenie nieważności w części spornego rozporządzenia"[dir=none];
  "pierwszej izby Sądu"->"Postanowieniem z dnia 19 lipca 2016 r. 19/07/2016";
  "Postanowieniem z dnia 19 lipca 2016 r. 19/07/2016"->"Eurofer";
  "Postanowieniem z dnia 19 lipca 2016 r. 19/07/2016"->"dopuścił Eurofer do udziału w sprawie w charakterze interwenienta popierającego żądania Komisji.."[dir=none];
    
}
Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 29 July 2019.
Shanxi Taigang Stainless Steel Co. Ltd v European Commission.
Appeal — Dumping — Imposition of a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain products originating in China — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1429 — Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 — Article 2(7)(a) — Normal value — Determination on the basis of the price in a market economy third country — Selection of the appropriate third country — Market economy third country which is subject to the same investigation — Adjustments.
Case C-436/18 P. (2019)
Language: Portuguese

Por petição apresentada na Secretaria do Tribunal Geral em 20 de novembro de 2015, a recorrente interpôs um recurso de anulação parcial do regulamento controvertido.
Por Despacho de 19 de julho de 2016, o presidente da Primeira Secção do Tribunal Geral autorizou a Eurofer a intervir em apoio dos pedidos da Comissão.

Legal relationship diagram (Graphviz):
digraph {
    rankdir=LR;
    node [shape=box];
    
  "O Tribunal Geral"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "a recorrente"[shape=doubleoctagon];
  "Eurofer"[shape=doubleoctagon];
    
  "a recorrente"->"petição 20/11/2015";
  "petição 20/11/2015"->"O Tribunal Geral";
  "petição 20/11/2015"->"um recurso de anulação parcial do regulamento"[dir=none];
  "O Tribunal Geral"->"Despacho 19/07/2016";
  "Despacho 19/07/2016"->"Eurofer";
  "Despacho 19/07/2016"->"autorizou a Eurofer a intervir em apoio dos pedidos da Comissão.."[dir=none];
    
}