This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62020TA0111
Case T-111/20: Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — PT Wilmar Bioenergi Indonesia and Others v Commission (Subsidies — Imports of biodiesel originating in Indonesia — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2092 — Definitive countervailing duty — Article 3(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1037 — Financial contribution — Article 3(2) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Benefit — Article 7(1)(a) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Calculation of the amount of the countervailable subsidy — Article 3(1)(a)(iv) and (2) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Action consisting in ‘entrusting’ or ‘directing’ a private body to carry out a function constituting a financial contribution — Less than adequate remuneration — Income or price support — Article 28(5) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Use of available information — Article 3(2) and Article 6(d) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Benefit — Article 8(8) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Threat of material injury to the Union industry — Article 8(5) and (6) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Causal link — Attribution analysis — Non-attribution analysis)
Case T-111/20: Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — PT Wilmar Bioenergi Indonesia and Others v Commission (Subsidies — Imports of biodiesel originating in Indonesia — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2092 — Definitive countervailing duty — Article 3(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1037 — Financial contribution — Article 3(2) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Benefit — Article 7(1)(a) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Calculation of the amount of the countervailable subsidy — Article 3(1)(a)(iv) and (2) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Action consisting in ‘entrusting’ or ‘directing’ a private body to carry out a function constituting a financial contribution — Less than adequate remuneration — Income or price support — Article 28(5) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Use of available information — Article 3(2) and Article 6(d) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Benefit — Article 8(8) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Threat of material injury to the Union industry — Article 8(5) and (6) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Causal link — Attribution analysis — Non-attribution analysis)
Case T-111/20: Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — PT Wilmar Bioenergi Indonesia and Others v Commission (Subsidies — Imports of biodiesel originating in Indonesia — Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2092 — Definitive countervailing duty — Article 3(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1037 — Financial contribution — Article 3(2) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Benefit — Article 7(1)(a) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Calculation of the amount of the countervailable subsidy — Article 3(1)(a)(iv) and (2) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Action consisting in ‘entrusting’ or ‘directing’ a private body to carry out a function constituting a financial contribution — Less than adequate remuneration — Income or price support — Article 28(5) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Use of available information — Article 3(2) and Article 6(d) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Benefit — Article 8(8) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Threat of material injury to the Union industry — Article 8(5) and (6) of Regulation 2016/1037 — Causal link — Attribution analysis — Non-attribution analysis)
OJ C 63, 20.2.2023, p. 31–31
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
20.2.2023 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 63/31 |
Judgment of the General Court of 14 December 2022 — PT Wilmar Bioenergi Indonesia and Others v Commission
(Case T-111/20) (1)
(Subsidies - Imports of biodiesel originating in Indonesia - Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2092 - Definitive countervailing duty - Article 3(1)(a) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1037 - Financial contribution - Article 3(2) of Regulation 2016/1037 - Benefit - Article 7(1)(a) of Regulation 2016/1037 - Calculation of the amount of the countervailable subsidy - Article 3(1)(a)(iv) and (2) of Regulation 2016/1037 - Action consisting in ‘entrusting’ or ‘directing’ a private body to carry out a function constituting a financial contribution - Less than adequate remuneration - Income or price support - Article 28(5) of Regulation 2016/1037 - Use of available information - Article 3(2) and Article 6(d) of Regulation 2016/1037 - Benefit - Article 8(8) of Regulation 2016/1037 - Threat of material injury to the Union industry - Article 8(5) and (6) of Regulation 2016/1037 - Causal link - Attribution analysis - Non-attribution analysis)
(2023/C 63/37)
Language of the case: English
Parties
Applicants: PT Wilmar Bioenergi Indonesia (Medan, Indonesia), PT Wilmar Nabati Indonesia (Medan), PT Multi Nabati Sulawesi (North Sulawesi, Indonesia) (represented by: P. Vander Schueren and T. Martin-Brieu, lawyers)
Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P. Kienapfel, G. Luengo and P. Němečková, acting as Agents)
Intervener in support of the defendant: European Biodiesel Board (EBB) (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: M.-S. Dibling and L. Amiel, lawyers)
Re:
By their action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicants seek annulment of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/2092 of 28 November 2019 imposing a definitive countervailing duty on imports of biodiesel originating in Indonesia (OJ 2019 L 317, p. 42), in so far as that regulation concerns them.
Operative part of the judgment
The Court:
1. |
Dismisses the action; |
2. |
Orders PT Wilmar Bioenergi Indonesia, PT Wilmar Nabati Indonesia and PT Multi Nabati Sulawesi to pay the costs. |