24.7.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 239/27

—

quash the judgment of the General Court in case T-162/14;

—

uphold the application at first instance and annul the contested regulation in so far as it concerns appellants;

—

order the respondent to pay the appellants’ costs, and its own costs, both at first instance and on appeal;

—

order any other parties to the appeal to pay their own costs;

—

quash the judgment of the General Court in case T-162/14;

—

refer the case back to the General Court for judgment;

—

reserve the costs at first instance and on appeal for final judgment by the General Court;

—

order any other parties to the appeal to pay their own costs.

1.

The General Court erred in law by requiring appellants to show an interest in raising the first and second pleas; in any event, the General Court erred in its legal characterization of the facts as the appellants have such an interest.

2.

The General Court erred in law by requiring appellants to show an interest in raising the third plea; the General Court erred in its interpretation of Article 2(7)(a) of Regulation 1225/2009 (‘Basic Regulation’). (1)

3.

The General Court erred in law by finding that Regulation 1168/2012 applied to the present anti-dumping investigation (2); the General Court erred in law by finding that the Commission’s failure to make a determination on the appellants’ request for market economy treatment does not vitiate the contested regulation.

4.

The General Court erred in law by permitting the Institutions to set the anti-dumping duty at the level to counter injury caused by factors other than dumped imports; the General Court erred in law by unduly reversing the burden of proof.