PT Pelita Agung Agrindustri and PT Permata Hijau Palm Oleo v European Commission (T-143/20)

Judgment of 14 Dec 2022

law://eu/cjeu/2020/t-143-20/para_75@2026-11-12

75According to the case-law, the basic regulation does not in itself require the concept of ‘product under consideration’ necessarily to refer to a product considered to be a homogeneous whole composed of similar products (see, by analogy, judgment of 17 March 2016, Portmeirion Group, C‑232/14, EU:C:2016:180, paragraph 42). The definition of the ‘product under consideration’, at the time the investigation is initiated, does not prevent the EU institutions from subdividing that product into individual product types or models or from relying on model-by-model or type-by-type comparisons between the price of a product on the Union market and the price of imports (see, to that effect and by analogy, judgment of 5 April 2017, Changshu City Standard Parts Factory and Ningbo Jinding Fastener v Council, C‑376/15 P and C‑377/15 P, EU:C:2017:269, paragraph 59).

PT Pelita Agung Agrindustri and PT Permata Hijau Palm Oleo v European Commission (T-143/20)

Key facts

History · 1 version

Connections