Aluminium International Today
Court annuls anti-dumping duty on foil by Council Regulation (EC)
Edited by : AL CIRCLE
2 min read
On 5th November 2013, the General Court of the European Union upheld the application of RUSAL Armenal ZAO (“Armenal”), a foil-producing subsidiary of UC RUSAL located in Armenia, for annulment of a Council regulation that had imposed an anti-dumping duty on imports of aluminium foil by Armenal into the European Union.
Council Regulation (EC) No. 925/2009 of 24 September 2009 had imposed a definitive anti-dumping duty and a provisional duty on imports of certain aluminium foil originating in Armenia, Brazil, and the People’s Republic of China.
In December 2009 Armenal filed an application in Luxembourg against the Council for annulment of the Regulation. Armenal argued, among other things, that the Regulation violated Article 2(1) - (6) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (as amended), and Articles 2.1 and 2.2 of the Agreement on the Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994.
In March 2010 the European Commission intervened in the case, joining the Council in its opposition to Armenal’s application.
In its Judgment on 5th November 2013, the court held that Armenal’s above argument was well founded, annulled the regulation, and ordered the Council of the European Union to pay the costs incurred by Armenal in the case.
Council Regulation (EC) No. 925/2009 of 24 September 2009 had imposed a definitive anti-dumping duty and a provisional duty on imports of certain aluminium foil originating in Armenia, Brazil, and the People’s Republic of China.
In December 2009 Armenal filed an application in Luxembourg against the Council for annulment of the Regulation. Armenal argued, among other things, that the Regulation violated Article 2(1) - (6) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (as amended), and Articles 2.1 and 2.2 of the Agreement on the Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994.
In March 2010 the European Commission intervened in the case, joining the Council in its opposition to Armenal’s application.
In its Judgment on 5th November 2013, the court held that Armenal’s above argument was well founded, annulled the regulation, and ordered the Council of the European Union to pay the costs incurred by Armenal in the case.
Previous article
Kobe Steel’s aluminium forging plant starts integrated production
Next articleARABAL 2013: Challenges remain for growth of GCC’s downstream aluminium industry
Grow with
AL Circle
