Action brought on 4 September 2008 — EWRIA and Others v Commission

(Case T-369/08)

(2008/C 301/75)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: European Wire Rope Importers Association (EWRIA) (Hemer, Germany); Câbleries Namuroises SA (Namur, Belgium); Ropenhagen A/S (Vallensbæk Strand, Danemark); Eisen- und Stahlhandelsgesellschaft mbH (Kaarst, Germany); Heko Industrieerzeugnisse (Hemer, Germany); Interkabel Internationale Seil- und Kabel-Handels GmbH (Solms, Germany); Jose Casañ Colomar SA (Valencia, Spain); Denwire Ltd. (Dudley, United Kingdom) (represented by: T. Lieber, lawyer)

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Form of order sought

Pleas in law and main arguments

By means of this application the applicants seek annulment of the Commission decision of 4 July 2008 rejecting the applicants' request for partial interim review of the antidumping duty imposed on certain iron or steel ropes and cables originating in the People's Republic of China, India, South Africa, Ukraine and the Russian Federation (1) in view of exclusion of general purpose ropes (GPR) from the product scope of the measure. The Commission refused to initiate the interim measure review on the grounds of lack of evidence that the two product types under the measures, steel wire ropes and general purpose ropes, do not share the same basic physical, technical and chemical characteristics.

The applicants put forward three pleas in law in support of their claims.

First, the applicants claim that the failure of the Community institutions to initiate a partial interim review constitutes a breach of Article 11(3) and Article 21 of the basic regulation (2). They state that the change of circumstances justifying an interim review may also refer to the definition of the product concerned.

Second, the applicants submit that the failure of the Community institutions to initiate a partial interim review constitutes a breach of the applicants' legitimate expectations. They claim that the Commission itself had encouraged the applicants upon termination of expiry review concerning steel wire ropes originating in the People's Republic of China, India, South Africa and Ukraine to file a request for partial interim review to adjust the scope of the measures in question.

Finally, the applicants claim that by failing to initiate an interim review the Community institutions committed a manifest error of assessment and breached Article 1(4) of the basic regulation when they based their findings on too broad scope of products which led them to compare unlike products and thus arrive at invalid findings.

(1)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1796/1999 of 12 August 1999 as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1858/2005 of 8 November 2005 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of steel ropes and cables originating in the People's Republic of China, India, South Africa and Ukraine following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (OJ 2005 L 299, p. 1) and Council Regulation (EC) No 1601/2001 of 2 August 2001 as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1279/2007 of 30 October 2007 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain iron or steel ropes and cables originating in the Russian Federation, and repealing the anti-dumping measures on imports of certain iron or steel ropes and cables originating in Thailand and Turkey (OJ 2007 L 285, p. 1).

(2)  Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (OJ 1996 L 56, p. 1).