- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case T-629/21: Action brought on 29 September 2021 — Ereğli Demir ve Çelik Fabrikaları and Others v Commission
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62021TN0629
62021TN0629
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
22.11.2021
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 471/59
(Case T-629/21)
(2021/C 471/84)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicants: Ereğli Demir ve Çelik Fabrikaları TAŞ (Istanbul, Turkey), İskenderun Demir ve Çelik AŞ (Payas, Turkey), Erdemir Çelik Servis Merkezi Sanayi ve Ticaret AŞ (Gebze, Turkey) (represented by: J. Cornelis and F. Graafsma, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission
Form of order sought
The applicants claim that the Court should:
—annul Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1100 of 5 July 2021 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and definitively collecting the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain hot-rolled flat products of iron, non-alloy or other alloy steel originating in Turkey (OJ 2021 L 238, p. 32); and
—order the European Commission to pay the applicants’ costs.
Pleas in law and main arguments
In support of the action, the applicants rely on four pleas in law.
1.First plea in law, alleging a violation of Article 2(10)(j) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1) by carrying out a currency conversion that is not required. The applicants further allege that the chapeau of Article 2(10) and Article 2(5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 were also violated because the costs were not established on the basis of the records kept by the applicants.
2.Second plea in law, alleging a violation of Article 2(10)(j) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 as well as Article 2.4 of WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement and the principle of sound administration by rejecting an adjustment for hedging gains and losses.
3.Third plea in law, alleging a violation of Articles 2(5), 2(6) and the chapeau of Article 2(10) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 by double counting certain selling, general and administrative expenses for Isdemir domestic sales through Erdemir.
4.Fourth plea in law, alleging a violation of Article 2(6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 and Article 2.2.2 of WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement by excluding foreign exchange gains and losses from the selling, general and administrative expenses.
*
Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union (JO 2016 L 176, p. 21).