EUR-Lex & EU Commission AI-Powered Semantic Search Engine
Modern Legal
  • Query in any language with multilingual search
  • Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
  • See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Start free trial

Similar Documents

Explore similar documents to your case.

We Found Similar Cases for You

Sign up for free to view them and see the most relevant paragraphs highlighted.

Case T-176/23: Action brought on 31 March 2023 — PT Musim Mas v Commission

ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023TN0176

62023TN0176

March 31, 2023
With Google you find a lot.
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

22.5.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/71

(Case T-176/23)

(2023/C 179/99)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: PT Musim Mas (Medan, Indonesia) (represented by: B. Servais and V. Crochet, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Annul Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/111 of 18 January 2023 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of fatty acid originating in Indonesia in its entirety insofar as it concerns the applicant; and

Order the Commission and any intervener who may be allowed to support the Commission to bear the costs of these proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law.

1.First plea in law, alleging that the Commission violated the principles to state reasons and of good administration by deciding not to terminate the investigation in light of the withdrawal of the complaint.

2.Second plea in law, alleging that the Commission violated Articles 21(1) and 9(4) of the Basic Regulation by failing to conclude that it was not in the Union interest to impose measures.

3.Third plea in law, alleging that the Commission violated Articles 2(3), 2(6) and 9(4) of the Basic Regulation by using an unreasonable and wrongly computed profit margin to construct the normal value of product control numbers (PCNs) sold by the applicant in non-representative quantities on the domestic market.

4.Fourth plea in law, alleging that the Commission erred in law by constructing the normal value of five PCNs that were not sold at all by the applicant on the domestic market pursuant to Article 2(3) of the Basic Regulation without having first established whether it was possible to determine the normal value of these five PCNs on the basis of the second subparagraph of Article 2(1) of the Basic Regulation.

5.Fifth plea in law, alleging that the Commission has violated Article 9(4) of the Basic Regulation by imposing an anti-dumping duty which exceeds the dumping margin, as it used an incorrect exchange rate to convert the net invoice value and cost, insurance and freight values of certain transactions of ICOF Europe.

EurLex Case Law

AI-Powered Case Law Search

Query in any language with multilingual search
Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly

Get Instant Answers to Your Legal Questions

Cancel your subscription anytime, no questions asked.Start 14-Day Free Trial

At Modern Legal, we’re building the world’s best search engine for legal professionals. Access EU and global case law with AI-powered precision, saving you time and delivering relevant insights instantly.

Contact Us

Tivolska cesta 48, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia