The EU General Court's Grand Chamber on Sept. 13 rejected the Venezuelan government's challenge of the EU's Venezuela sanctions regime. The court said the European Council "relied on credible and reliable information" to assess the situation in Venezuela, which included "brutal repression" by the government. The court also said Venezuelan reports showing its government prosecuted these human rights abuses weren't enough to reveal a "manifest error" in the council's decision. The sanctions regime itself didn't violate international law, the court added, nor was it an illegal countermeasure because the sanctions weren't meant to be a reaction to an "internationally wrongful act imputable" to the Venezuelan government.
Liquidation may not be final in cases where CBP is "acting at the behest of another agency," law firm Neville Peterson said in a Sept. 13 blog post commenting on the Court of International Trade's ruling in AM/NS Calvert v. U.S. In that decision, the trade court entries subject to Section 232 steel and aluminum duties may not be final, given that the case contests the applications of product-specific exclusions granted by the Commerce Department and not by CBP (see 2309070037).
The merger between law firms Allen & Overy and Shearman & Sterling will be completed by Oct. 13 following the voting process that is to begin on Sept. 28, the firms announced. Ahead of the vote, the firms said they successfully completed "a number of key transaction milestones," including financial and operational due diligence, antitrust clearance filings, and retirement and pension program modifications. Both are global law firms with varying practice areas, including international trade and financial sanctions.
No lawsuits were recently filed at the Court of International Trade.
The classification of gun sight inserts that use tritium for powerless illumination in low light conditions are properly classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 9022 under the first General Rule of Interpretation (GRI), importer Trijicon argued in a Sept. 15 motion for summary judgment at the Court of International Trade (Trijicon v. United States, CIT # 22-00040).
Marble importer Stoneline Group filed suit in a New York federal court against Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. for breach of contract regarding an insurance policy covering a large shipment of tumbled beige marble stone from Turkey. Filing a complaint on Sept. 14 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Stoneline said Liberty owes it nearly $6.2 million for all the costs it incurred shipping the goods from Turkey to Florida, then re-exporting the products to the Dominican Republic after it found the shipment was contaminated with pests (Stoneline Group v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., S.D.N.Y. #23-08115).
The following lawsuit was recently filed at the Court of International Trade:
Antidumping duty petitioner Association of American School Paper Supplies filed for and was granted dismissal of its lawsuit challenging a review of the AD order on lined paper products from India. The petitioner filed the suit to contest the Commerce Department's use of Afghanistan as a comparison market for India, arguing that the prices in Afghanistan were not representative and shouldn't have been the basis for normal value (see 2306060041). No reason was given for the case's dismissal, but all parties that had appeared in the action agreed to it (Association of American School Paper Suppliers v. United States, CIT # 23-00102).
The U.S. filed a motion to remand an Enforce and Protect Act case in light of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's ruling in Royal Brush Manufacturing v. United States, in which the appellate court said CBP violated an EAPA party's due process rights by not granting them access to business confidential information. Filing the Sept. 14 motion in a Court of International Trade case filed by importer Newtrend USA Co., the government claimed that a limited remand is needed because the opinion concerns "the treatment of confidential information" (Newtrend USA Co. v. United States, CIT # 22-00347).
Vietnam's Ministry of Industry and Trade asked the Commerce Department to conduct a review of the country's status as a non-market economy, telling the agency that the nation's "achievements in market opening and integration into the regional and global economy" stand as grounds for review. Seeking to build on the back of the 2013 comprehensive partnership agreement between the U.S. and Vietnam, the ministry asked for a changed circumstances review of its NME status.