The Article 11(3) interim review, initiated on the basis of a request to revise measures in order to take into due account the current market conditions, concluded that the circumstances which led to the existing measures have changed significantly and that such changes are to be considered sufficiently lasting to warrant a downward revision of the dumping margins established during the original investigation.

(12) As in the previous expiry review, the investigation has shown that the silicon, produced in the PRC and sold domestically, as well as that exported to the Community, the silicon produced and sold on the domestic market of the analogue country (Norway) and that manufactured and sold in the Community by the applicant Community producers have the same basic physical and chemical characteristics, and the same basic uses.

It must be recalled that the measures imposed on imports of PSF originating in the Republic of Korea were repealed because it was considered there was no likelihood of recurrence of dumping following the findings of an expiry review, the investigation period of which covered from 1 January 1996 to 30 September 1997. During the IP of the current proceeding however, dumping was established and the above argument is therefore not valid.

The Commission, having determined that sufficient evidence existed for the initiation of an interim review, and after consultation of the Advisory Committee, announced by a notice ('notice of initiation') published in the Official Journal of the European Communities () the initiation of an investigation pursuant to Article 11 (3) of the basic Regulation with regard to imports into the Community of PSF originating in Belarus, limited in scope to the examination of dumping.

In carrying out investigations under this Article, the exporters, importers, the country of origin and/or export and the Community producers shall be provided with the opportunity to amplify, rebut or comment on the matters set out in the review request, and conclusions shall be reached with due account taken of all relevant and duly documented evidence presented in relation to the question as to whether the expiry of measures would be likely, or unlikely, to lead to the continuation or recurrence of subsidization and injury.

Where the countervailing duties imposed are less than the amount of countervailable subsidies found, an interim review may be initiated if the Community producers or any other interested party submit, normally within two years from the entry into force of the measures, sufficient evidence that, after the original investigation period and prior to or following the imposition of measures, export prices have decreased or that there has been no movement, or insufficient movement of resale prices of the imported product in the Community.

CURRENT REVIEW INVESTIGATION

During the interim review investigation, a number of interested parties have alleged that in the time since the investigation period, the market situation has changed dramatically.

In the context of this review investigation, it is extremely important to note that the export price of the Chinese lighters dropped by around 23 % in the current investigation period when compared to the original investigation period (1989).

By Decision 93/377/EEC (4), the Commission terminated the above review investigation without any changes to the measures in force.

In this respect, it has to be recalled that the newcomer review investigation referred to in recital 2 concluded that no individual treatment could be granted to any of the four Chinese companies involved in the said investigation.

As the evidence that was presented was insufficient to justify the inclusion of electronic lighters in the investigation, and the request was made belatedly by a party that had supported the request for a review without reservation, the request for an extension of the scope of the review investigation could not be granted.

As mentioned in recital (36), only one Polish producer/exporter and one Polish trading company could be considered as cooperating parties in the present review investigation.

RESULT OF THE INVESTIGATION CONCERNING THE INTERIM REVIEW

Two months after the opening of the review investigation, Swedish Match S.A. made a request to extend the scope of this review investigation to electronic (or piezo) lighters arguing that gas-fuelled, non-refillable pocket flint lighters and gas-fuelled, non-refillable electronic lighters (hereinafter "electronic lighters") formed one single category of the product.

The conclusions reached above as to dumping, injury, causation and Community interest call for definitive measures, both for the countries under the new investigation and for those under the review investigation, with the exception of Croatia, for which the anti-dumping proceeding should be terminated.

This period covers basically the time from the initiation of the review investigation until the imposition of the substantially increased anti-dumping duty on imports from the People's Republic of China.

This interim review investigation was initiated in parallel with an investigation opened on the same date (5) in respect of such imports originating in Russia, the Czech Republic, Romania and the Slovak Republic following a complaint lodged by the Defence Committee of the Seamless Steel Tube Industry of the European Union.

This evolution of quantities and prices coincided in time with the start of the review investigation on Chinese disposable, non-refillable flint lighters at the end of 1993 (6), and the imposition of a higher dumping duty in 1995.

General remarks (39) It should be stressed that the present review investigation was carried out further to a request from the Community industry alleging that dumping of Chinese disposable flint lighters had dramatically increased since the conclusion of the original investigation and claiming that the measures in force should be amended in order to remove further injury caused to the Community industry.

As no request for a review of the findings on injury was made in the request for the investigation, the review was limited to dumping.

In accordance with the allegation in the review request that dumping margins would increase if measures were removed, the investigation included a review of dumping for the investigation period.

The various types of review investigations have different potential scopes and degrees of complexity.

The investigation period for dumping for the expiry review is 1 July 2000 to 30 June 2001 ("expiry IP").

As no request for a review of the findings on injury was made in the request for the investigation, the review was limited to subsidies granted to Indo Pet.

In the interim review investigation, the Commission officially advised the Hungarian, Polish and Croatian producers/exporters, and the importers known to be concerned, the representatives of the exporting countries and the complainant, and gave the parties directly concerned the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request a hearing.

Two of the nine Community producers supporting the review request did not cooperate during the the investigation.

The investigation period for dumping for the interim review is 1 October 1999 to 30 September 2000 ("interim IP").

It was considered that the review request contained sufficient evidence to justify the opening of an investigation.

This limit may be reviewed in the light of the results of any investigations carried out and of the monitoring programme;

However, given that the company which cooperated in the Philippines is part of a group of companies of which a complainant is also part, the Commission also considered it necessary to analyse the implications of the existence of such links, with a view to determining whether this situation had any distorting effect on the data submitted and, accordingly, whether this information could or could not be used in the framework of the current review investigation.

Therefore, based on the findings of this review, the causal link established between dumping and injury in the original case can not be assumed to be present in this investigation, although the current partial interim review did not expressly include a review of the causality established in the original case.

The manufacturer shall regularly review his manufacturing methods in the light of scientific and technical progress and the development of the investigational medicinal product.

The investigation with regard to Hungary, Poland and the Republic of Croatia was an interim review which was initiated in parallel with the new investigation in order to examine globally the situation with regard to all imports of seamless pipes and tubes into the Community.

Having determined, after consultation of the Advisory Committee, that sufficient evidence existed for the initiation of a review, the Commission announced the initiation of an expiry review(5), pursuant to Article 11(2) of the Basic Regulation and commenced an investigation.

The authorities shall review the accuracy and adequacy of the evidence provided in the application to determine whether the evidence is sufficient to justify the initiation of an investigation.

The investigation has revealed that the import volume of the product under consideration from China was higher than in the IP of the previous expiry review and that it had clearly remained at dumped levels.

Decision No 75 of 22 February 1973 concerning the investigation of applications for review made under Article 94(5) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 by invalidity pensioners (OJ C 75, 19.9.1973, p. 5).

By a notice published in March 1992 (3) the Commission initiated a review of Regulation (EEC) No 3433/91 in so far as it concerned certain Chinese companies which alleged, in particular, that they did not export the product concerned during the period covered by the original investigation (a so-called newcomer review).

In the case of investigational medicinal products, the manufacturer shall, in cooperation with the sponsor, implement a system for recording and reviewing complaints together with an effective system for recalling promptly and at any time investigational medicinal products which have already entered the distribution network.

The relevant provisions of this Regulation with regard to procedures and the conduct of investigations, excluding those relating to time limits, shall apply to any review carried out pursuant to paragraphs 2, 3 and 4.

However, during the investigation of the interim review concerning the period from 1 October 2001 to 30 September 2002 (the investigation period), information on a change of market conditions occurred after the investigation period (i.e. from 1 October 2002 to 30 September 2003) which might justify the suspension of the measures currently in force, in accordance with Article 14(4) of the basic Regulation, was provided to the Commission.

Having determined, after consulting the Advisory Committee, that sufficient evidence existed for the initiation of a review, the Commission initiated an investigation(9) pursuant to Article 11(2) of the Basic Regulation.

Having determined, after consulting the Advisory Committee, that sufficient evidence existed for the initiation of a review, the Commission initiated an investigation pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation(6).

On this basis, it was found that during the investigation period, the Community producers on behalf of which the request for a review was lodged, represented more than 70 % of total Community production of the like product.

whereas it is also necessary to provide, in cases where sufficient evidence is submitted of changed circumstances, for interim reviews or for investigations to determine whether refunds of anti-dumping duties are warranted;

whereas it is also necessary to provide, in cases where sufficient evidence is submitted of changed circumstances, for interim reviews or for investigations to determine whether refunds of countervailing duties are warranted;

Having determined, after consultation of the Advisory Committee, that sufficient evidence existed for the initiation of a review, the Commission initiated an investigation pursuant to Article 11(2) of the Basic Regulation(7).

Having determined, after consultation of the Advisory Committee, that sufficient evidence existed for the initiation of a review, the Commission initiated an investigation(7), pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation.

The product covered by the current review is the same as in the original investigation, i.e. polyethylene terephthalate (PET) with a coefficient of viscosity of 78 ml/g or higher, according to DIN (Deutsche Industrienorm) 53728.