1.Under the second paragraph of Article 215 of the Treaty and the general principles to which that provision refers, Community liability depends on the coincidence of a set of conditions as regards the unlawfulness of the conduct alleged against the institutions, the fact of damage and the existence of a direct link in the chain of causality between the wrongful act and the damage complained of ( see the judgments of 28 April 1971 in Case 4/69 Luetticke v Commission (( 1971 )) ECR 325, of 2 July 1974 in Case 153/73 Holz and Willemsen v Council and Commission (( 1974 )) ECR 675, and of 17 December 1981 in Joined Cases 197 to 200, 243, 245 and 247/80 Ludwigshafener Walzmuehle v Council and Commission (( 1981 )) ECR 3211 ).
2.The decisions of the Council and the Commission in connection with a proceeding relating to the possible adoption of anti-dumping measures constitute legislative action involving choices of economic policy . In accordance with consistent case-law, Community liability can be incurred on account of such decisions only if there has been a sufficiently serious breach of a superior rule of law for the protection of the individual ( see the judgment of 2 December 1971 in Case 5/71 Zuckerfabrik Schoeppenstedt v Council (( 1971 )) ECR 975 ).
3.The one-year period provided for in Article 7(9 ) of Regulation No 2176/84 for the conduct of anti-dumping proceedings is a guide and not a mandatory period . This is clear both from the wording of the provision in question and from the nature of the anti-dumping proceeding whose progress does not depend solely on the efforts of the Community authorities . However, it follows from Article 7(9 ) that the anti-dumping proceeding must not be extended beyond a reasonable period to be assessed according to the particular circumstances of each case ( see the judgment, also of 28 November 1989, in Case C-121/86 Epicheiriseon Metalleftikon Viomichanikon kai Naftiliakon and Others v Council (( 1989 )) ECR ).
4.Under Article 12 of Regulation No 2176/84, the Council is competent to rule on all the conditions which must be satisfied for the imposition of an anti-dumping duty without being obliged to adopt every proposal made in that connection by the Commission ( see the judgment of the same date : 28 November 1989 in Case C-121/86 Epicheiriseon Metalleftikon Viomichanikon kai Naftiliakon and Others v Council (( 1989 )) ECR ).
In Case C-122/86
( 1)Anonymos Etaireia Epicheiriseon Metalleftikon Viomichanikon kai Naftiliakon AE,
( 2)Makedonikoi Lefkolithoi, Metalleftiki, Viomichaniki kai Naftiliaki Etaireia AE,
( 3 ) Ellinikoi Lefkolithoi Metalleftiki, Viomichaniki, Naftiliaki kai Emporiki Etaireia AE,
( 4)Magnomin Geniki Metalleftiki Etaireia AE, Metalleftiki Emporiki kai Metapoiitiki,
companies incorporated under Greek law, all of whose registered offices are in Athens, represented by Panagiotis Bernitsas, of the Athens Bar, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the Chambers of Aloyse May, 31 Grand-rue,
applicants,
v
Commission of the European Communities, represented by Dimitrios Gouloussis and John Temple Lang, Legal Adviser of the Commission, and by Theofanis Christoforou, a member of its legal department, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Georgios Kremlis, a member of its Legal Department, Wagner Centre, Kirchberg,
and
Council of the European Communities, represented by Erik Stein, Legal Adviser, and by Christos Mavrakos, a member of its Legal Department, with an address for service in Luxembourg at the office of Joerg Kaeser, Director of the Legal Affairs Directorate of the European Investment Bank, 100 boulevard Kondrad-Adenauer,
defendants,
APPLICATION under Articles 178 and the second paragraph of Article 215 of the EEC Treaty for compensation for the damage caused by Council Decision 86/59/EEC of 6 March 1986 terminating the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of dead-burned ( sintered ) natural magnesite originating in the People' s Republic of China and North Korea ( Official Journal 1986, L 70, p . 41 ), and by the Council decision not to adopt Commission Proposal COM(83 ) 341 for a regulation imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on those imports,
THE COURT
composed of : O . Due, President, Sir Gordon Slynn and C . N . Kakouris ( Presidents of Chambers ), T . Koopmans, R . Joliet, J . C . Moitinho de Almeida, G . C . Rodríguez Iglesias, F . Grévisse and M . Diez de Velasco, Judges,
( the grounds of the judgment are not reproduced )
hereby :
( 1)Dismisses the application;
( 2 ) Orders the applicants to pay the costs .
