Odbor kompatibility s právem ES Úřad vlády ČR	I S A P Informační Systém pro Aproximaci Práva
	Databáze č. 17 : Databáze judikatury

ă Odbor kompatibility s právem ES, Úřad vlády ČR - určeno pouze pro potřebu ministerstev a ostatních ústředních orgánů


	Číslo (Kód CELEX): Number (CELEX Code):		61989J0170

	Název: Title:		JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF 28 NOVEMBER 1991. BUREAU EUROPEEN DES UNIONS DE CONSOMMATEURS V COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES. ANTI-DUMPING PROCEEDING - RIGHT TO INSPECT THE COMMISSION' S NON-CONFIDENTIAL FILE. CASE C-170/89.

	Publikace: Publication:		REPORTS OF CASES 1991 PAGES I-5709

	Předmět (klíčová slova): Keywords		EXTERNAL RELATIONS;COMMERCIAL POLICY;DUMPING;

	Související předpisy: Corresponding acts:		388R2423

	Odkaz na souvisejicí judikáty: Corresponding Judgements:


	Plný text: Fulltext:		Ne

Fakta:

Názor soudu a komentář:

Shrnutí (Summary of the Judgment):
1. AN ACTION FOR ANNULMENT OF A COMMISSION LETTER REFUSING A CONSUMER ORGANIZATION ACCESS TO NON-CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS IN AN ANTI-DUMPING PROCEEDING IS ADMISSIBLE. BY REFUSING THE ORGANIZATION ACCESS TO THE NON-CONFIDENTIAL FILE THE LETTER IS NOT MERELY A COMMUNICATION INFORMING IT OF ITS LEGAL POSITION WITH RESPECT TO THE PROVISIONS GOVERNING ANTI-DUMPING PROCEEDINGS BUT CONSTITUTES A DECISION ADVERSELY AFFECTING ITS INTERESTS.

2. AN ORGANIZATION WHOSE OBJECTS ARE DIRECTED AT CONSUMER PROTECTION CANNOT, IN THE ABSENCE OF EXPRESS PROVISION, RELY IN ANTI-DUMPING OR ANTI-SUBSIDY PROCEEDINGS ON THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OF THE RIGHT TO A FAIR HEARING IN ORDER TO CLAIM ACCESS TO NON-CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED IN THE COURSE OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE. ANTI-DUMPING AND ANTI-SUBSIDY PROCEEDINGS AND ANY PROTECTIVE MEASURES ADOPTED AT THE END OF SUCH PROCEEDINGS ARE DIRECTED AGAINST IMPORTS OF CERTAIN PRODUCTS IN RESPECT OF WHICH ALLEGATIONS HAVE BEEN MADE OF DUMPING BY FOREIGN PRODUCERS OR EXPORTERS AND, IN CERTAIN CASES, BY IMPORTERS OR OF SUBSIDIES BY NON-MEMBER COUNTRIES. SUCH PROCEEDINGS AND ANY MEASURES ADOPTED AT THE CONCLUSION THEREOF ARE NOT DIRECTED AGAINST PRACTICES ATTRIBUTABLE TO CONSUMERS OR CONSUMER ORGANIZATIONS. IT FOLLOWS THAT A PROCEEDING INITIATED UNDER THE BASIC ANTI -DUMPING REGULATION, REGULATION NO 2423/88, CANNOT RESULT IN A MEASURE ADVERSELY AFFECTING THEM, SINCE NO ALLEGATION IS MADE AGAINST THEM. NEITHER
THE RIGHT TO A FAIR HEARING NOR ARTICLE 7(4)(A) OF THE BASIC ANTI-DUMPING REGULATION IMPOSES ON THE COMMISSION ANY OBLIGATION TO GRANT CONSUMER ORGANIZATIONS ACCESS TO NON-CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE PROCEEDINGS.

3. THE ADMINISTRATIVE ANTI-DUMPING PROCEEDINGS AND THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT FOR ANNULMENT OF REGULATIONS IMPOSING PROTECTIVE MEASURES HAVE DIFFERENT PURPOSES. MOREOVER, THE RULES GOVERNING THE ORGANIZATION OF SUCH PROCEEDINGS SERVE DIFFERENT OBJECTIVES. ANTI-DUMPING PROCEEDINGS ARE INTENDED, FIRST, TO ENSURE THAT IMPORTS INTO THE COMMUNITY ARE NOT THE SUBJECT OF DUMPING CAUSING INJURY TO COMMUNITY INDUSTRY AND, SECONDLY, TO ENABLE THE INSTITUTIONS TO ADOPT THE NECESSARY MEASURES WITHIN A REASONABLE PERIOD IF REQUIRED BY THE INTERESTS OF THE COMMUNITY. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT, ON THE OTHER HAND, ARE INTENDED, AS ARTICLE 164 OF THE EEC TREATY PROVIDES, TO ENSURE THAT "THE LAW IS OBSERVED". THE FACT THAT A CONSUMER ORGANIZATION MAY, WHERE APPROPRIATE, BE GRANTED LEAVE BY THE COURT TO INTERVENE IN PROCEEDINGS BEFORE IT AND OBTAIN THE RIGHT OF ACCESS AS AN INTERVENER TO NON-CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS PRODUCED BY THE PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDINGS DOES NOT THEREFORE MEAN THAT SUCH A RIGHT SHOULD ALSO BE GRANTE
D IN ADMINISTRATIVE ANTI-DUMPING PROCEEDINGS.

4. FROM THE VERY WORDING OF ARTICLE 7(4)(A) OF REGULATION NO 2423/88, IT IS APPARENT THAT THE COUNCIL CHOSE TO GRANT THE RIGHT OF ACCESS TO THE NON-CONFIDENTIAL FILE TO THOSE MOST DIRECTLY CONCERNED BY THE ALLEGED DUMPING, NAMELY THE COMPLAINANT AND THE IMPORTERS AND EXPORTERS KNOWN TO BE CONCERNED. SUCH A RIGHT WAS NOT GRANTED TO CONSUMERS AGAINST WHOM NO COMPLAINT IS MADE. IT CANNOT BE CONCLUDED THAT BY MAKING THAT CHOICE THE COUNCIL INFRINGED THE RIGHT TO A FAIR HEARING OR THE PRINCIPLE OF SOUND ADMINISTRATION. HOWEVER, THERE IS NOTHING IN THE WORDING OF ARTICLE 7(4)(A) OF THE REGULATION TO PREVENT THE COMMISSION FROM ALLOWING PERSONS WHO HAVE A LEGITIMATE INTEREST TO INSPECT THE NON-CONFIDENTIAL FILE.

Plný text judikátu (Entire text of the Judgment):