E imported calcium from outside the EC, which it then processed itself. There was only one C producer of calcium, P, which refused to supply the raw material to E. P claimed that E’s supplies from outside the EC were being dumped in the EC & a dumping duty was imposed, which E then sought to have annulled. ECJ said that E did have standing because it had an individual interest and was directly affected by the anti-dumping regulation because it satisfied the Plaumann test.
ECJ: “E has established the existence of factors constituting such a situation…E is the largest importer of the product forming the subject-matter of the anti-dumping measure &, at the same time, is the end user of the product. In addition, its business activities depend to a very large extent on those imports and are seriously affected by the contested regulation in view of the limited number of manufacturers of the product concerned and of the difficulties which it encounters in obtaining supplies from the sole C producer, which, moreover, is its main competitor for the processed product.” This seems to be more economically-rational than the Plaumann test: Here the court is saying that because of economic factors (prominence in the market, difficulty of getting supply from within the Community (C) and hence effect on its business) it is individually concerned in a way that other undertakings are not. Also the court is not making the erroneous argument that any undertaking could just join this market and thus be affected by the regulation, as it argued in other cases (above).