EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 61995CJ0245

Sommarju tas-sentenza

Keywords
Summary

Keywords

1 Procedure - Time-limits - Extension on account of distance - Application to the Community institutions - Place of residence to be taken into consideration in the case of an appeal

(Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, Annex II, Art. 1)

2 Common commercial policy - Protection against dumping - Review procedure - Re-opening of investigation - Conditions - Sufficient evidence of dumping and resultant injury

(Council Regulation No 2423/88, Arts 4, 7, 14 and 15)

Summary

1 For the purposes of lodging an appeal, the Commission, whose seat is in Brussels, is entitled to a procedural extension on account of distance of two days, pursuant to Article 1 of the Decision of the Court on extension of time-limits on account of distance, forming Annex II to the rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice, despite the fact that it has stated an address for service in Luxembourg for the purposes of the procedure before the Court of First Instance.

The above provision takes into consideration only the place of habitual residence of the party concerned, not the address for service given by that party in accordance with Article 44(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of First Instance or Article 38(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice.

Moreover, appeal proceedings before the Court of Justice are distinct from previous proceedings before the Court of First Instance, so that the choice of an address for service for the purposes of those proceedings does not apply for the purposes of any appeal.

2 The existence of sufficient evidence of dumping and the injury resulting therefrom is always a prerequisite for the opening of an investigation, within the meaning of Article 7 of the basic anti-dumping Regulation No 2423/88, whether at the initiation of an anti-dumping proceeding or in the course of a review of a regulation imposing anti-dumping duties.

In that connection, where, in the course of a review procedure opened pursuant to Articles 14 and 15 of the basic regulation, the Community institutions must consider whether the expiry of an anti-dumping measure previously imposed could once more lead to injury or to a threat of injury, such consideration must comply with the provisions of Article 4 of the basic regulation.

Top