Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 61987CC0176

Bendra generalinio advokato Mischo išvada, pateikta 1990 m. gruodžio 13 d.
Konishiroku Photo Industry Co. Ltd prieš Europos Bendrijų Tarybą.
Byla C-176/87.
Sanyo Electric Co. Ltd prieš Europos Bendrijų Tarybą.
Byla C-177/87.

ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:C:1990:467

61987C0176

JOINED OPINIONS OF MR ADVOCATE GENERAL MISCHO DELIVERED ON 13 DECEMBER 1990. - KONISHIROKU PHOTO INDUSTRY CO LTD V COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES. - CASE C-176/87. - SANYO ELECTRIC CO LTD V COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES. - CASE C-177/87. - ANTI-DUMPING DUTY ON IMPORTS OF PLAIN PAPER PHOTOCOPIERS ORIGINATING IN JAPAN.

European Court reports 1992 Page I-01493


Opinion of the Advocate-General


++++

Mr President,

Members of the Court,

1. The major part of the submissions of the applicants in Cases C-176/87 Konishiroku, and C-177/87 Sanyo, comprises observations lodged jointly with those of the applicants in Cases C-174/87 Ricoh v Council, C-175/87 Matsushita v Council, and C-179/87 Sharp v Council. Those observations concern determination of the injury, evaluation of the Community interest and calculation of the anti-dumping duty. The submissions of Konishiroku and Sanyo in that regard must therefore be rejected for the reasons given in my Opinion in Case C-174/87 Ricoh, to which I would refer the Court.

2. As regards the observations of the applicants in the present cases concerning "the Commission' s practices in calculating whether dumping was present" which, occupying one typewritten page, form part of the introduction to their applications, I, like the Council, consider that it is unnecessary to examine them. As each of the applicants states that,

"since other exporters will be raising these matters in separate applications, and in order to reduce the volume of pleadings to be examined by the Court, this application will concentrate on the questions of injury and Community interest" (page ii of each of the applications),

it may be considered that those observations do not actually form part of their applications. Moreover, they are rather imprecise and could be easily refuted, first on the basis of the principle that the methods of calculating the normal value and the export price respectively are independent and, secondly, by virtue of the considerations set out in my Opinions in the other cases in relation to the submissions concerning the comparison of those two items.

3. In conclusion, I propose that the Court dismiss the applications in Cases C-176/87 and C-177/87 and order Konishiroku and Sanyo to pay the costs, including those of the interveners.

(*) Original language: French.

Top