Orders nº T-192/08 of Court of First Instance of the European Communities, February 16, 2009

• Resolution Date: February 16, 2009
• Issuing Organization: Court of First Instance of the European Communities
• Decision Number: T-192/08

(Intervention – Confidentiality)

In Case T‑192/08,

Transnational Company ‘Kazchrome’ AO, established in Actobe (Kazakhstan),

ENRC Marketing AG, established in Kloten (Switzerland),

represented by L. Ruessmann and A. Willems, lawyers,

applicants,

v

Council of the European Union, represented by J.-P. Hix, acting as Agent,

defendant,

supported by

Commission of the European Communities, represented by H. van Vliet and K. Talabér-Ritz, acting as Agents,

intervener,

ACTION for annulment in part of Council Regulation (EC) No 172/2008 of 25 February 2008 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of ferro-silicon originating in the People’s Republic of China, Egypt, Kazakhstan, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Russia (OJ 2008 L 55, p. 6),

THE PRESIDENT OF THE SECOND CHAMBER OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

makes the following

Order

Procedure

1 By application lodged at the Court Registry on 21 May 2008, the applicants brought an action for the annulment of Council Regulation (EC) No 172/2008 of 25 February 2008 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of ferro-silicon originating in the People’s Republic of China, Egypt, Kazakhstan, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Russia (OJ 2008 L 55, p. 6; ‘the contested regulation’), in so far as that regulation applies to them.

2 By document lodged at the Court Registry on 1 September 2008, Euroalliages, an international non-profit-making association representing European Union producers of ferro-alloys and other electrometallurgical products, applied for leave to intervene in the present case in support of the form of order sought by the Council.

3 The application for leave to intervene was served on the parties in accordance with Article 116(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court. The Council and the applicants submitted their written observations on the application for leave to intervene by documents lodged at the Court Registry on 20 and 28 October 2008 respectively. The applicants raised objections to that application for leave to intervene.

4 By document lodged at the Court Registry on 28 October 2008, the applicants requested that, pursuant to Article 116(2) of the Rules of Procedure, certain confidential matters in the case-file not be communicated to Euroalliages. For the purpose of such communication, the applicants produced a non-confidential version of the relevant pleadings and documents.

The application for leave to intervene

Arguments of the applicant for leave to intervene and of the parties

5 In support of its application, Euroalliages submits, first, that the complaint that it lodged with the Commission, on 16 October 2006, on behalf of its members, initiated the anti-dumping proceeding which led to the adoption of the contested regulation. Second, it...