Art 230: Standing For Non-privileged Applicants In Particular Areas
Bookmark this page

Court arguably more liberal in some areas of the law than in others.

(a)    anti-dumping  cases-

objective of the anit-dumping regultions is to prevent non-MS from selling goods into the EU at a low price to the detriment of traders within the MS.

3 types of applicatns in such cases: the firm bringing the accusatns, the producer of the goods, the importer of the goods. Problem is that the anti-dumping measures must be imposed by regulatn and not by decisn. Therefore if the ECJ holds that the regulatnis in fact not a regulatn then it is arguable whether the Commn has any pwr to impose the regulation.

Timex case, the complainant firm was accorded standing in order to challenge the level of anti-dumping.

Allied case, producers and exporters could also be regarded as d & i. c.

Positn is rather more complex with the case of importers. As can be seen by Extramet case.

(NB the above may not be required)

Other Notes in this Category

1. Art 230(173): Direct Concern
2. Art 230: Policy Arguments Concerning Standing Of Non-privileged Applicants
3. Art 230: Standing For Non-privileged Applicants In Particular Areas
4. Article 230: a critical analysis of the general standing rules for non-priveleged applicants

Didn't find this useful?

• Visit Coursework.Info for over 14,000 GCSE, A-Level and University Essays