Judgment_paragraph 96 · Hengshi Egypt Fiberglass Fabrics SAE and Jushi Egypt for Fiberglass Industry SAE v European Commission (T-480/20)

96Furthermore, contrary to what the applicants claim, that conclusion is supported by the provisions of Article 1 of the SCM Agreement, in the light of which the basic anti-subsidy regulation must be interpreted. In that regard, it should be recalled that, where the European Union intended to implement a particular obligation assumed in the context of the WTO, or where the EU measure refers expressly to precise provisions of the WTO agreements, it is for the Courts of the European Union to review the legality of the EU measure in question in the light of the WTO rules (see, by analogy, judgment of 14 July 2021, Interpipe Niko Tube and Interpipe Nizhnedneprovsky Tube Rolling Plant v Commission, T‑716/19, EU:T:2021:457, paragraph 95).

Hengshi Egypt Fiberglass Fabrics SAE and Jushi Egypt for Fiberglass Industry SAE v European Commission (T-480/20)

Key facts

History · 1 version

Connections