No L 120/34 Official Journal of the European Communities 15. 5. 93 COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 1189/93 of 14 May 1993 imposing definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of certain seamless pipes /' and tubes, of iron or non-alloy steel, originating in Hungary, Poland and the  Republic of Croatia and definitively collecting provisional anti-dumping duties THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88 of 11 July 1988 on protection against dumped or subsi- dized imports from countries not members of the Euro- pean Economic Community (), and in particular Article 12 thereof, Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commis- sion, after consultations within the Advisory Committee as provided for under the above Regulation, Whereas : A. PREVIOUS ACTION (1) By Regulation (EEC) No 3296/92 (), the Commis- sion imposed provisional anti-dumping duties on imports of certain seamless pipes and tubes, of iron or non-alloy steel, originating in Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland and the Republic of Croatia. The Council, by Regulation (EEC) No 545/93(), extended these duties for a period not exceeding two months. Due to the political changes as from 1 January 1993, the proceeding now concerns the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic as successors of the former Czech and Slovak Federal Republic. B. SUBSEQUENT PROCEDURE (2  Following the imposition of the provisional anti- ‘ dumping duties, the interested parties who so requested were granted an opportunity to be heard by the Commission. They also made written submissions making known their views on the findings. ' (3  The Czech, Slovak and Hungarian exporters alleged that the Commission had failed to fulfil its obliga- tions pursuant to Articles 23, 27 (2) and 27 (3) (b) of the Interim Agreements (‘) on trade and trade- related matters, concluded between the European () OJ No L 209, 2. 8. 1988, p. 1. () O] No 2 328, 14. 11. 1992, p. 15. () OJ No L 58, 11. 3. 1993, p. 1. () Czechoslovakia: OJ No L 115, 30. 4. 1992, p. 2. Hungary: OJ No L 116, 30. 4. 1992, p. 2. @ ® © ® Economic Community and the European Coal and Steel Community of the one part, and the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic and the Republic of Hungary of the other part, by omitting in particular duly to inform the Joint Committees set up under . the Interim Agreements as it was required to do at certain stages of the proceeding. As far as the initiation of the proceedings is concerned, the Council notes that at the time of the initiation of the procedure the Interim Agree- ments had not yet entered into force and the Joint Committees had not been set up. The Commission therefore notified the competent authorities of the countries concerned purusant to Article 7 (1) (b) of Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88 of the initiation of the proceeding. After-the imposition of provisional duties, the Joint Committees were notified pursuant to Article 27 (3) (b) of the Interim Agree- ments. In this respect some exporters claimed that there was no urgency in this case for the Commission to impose provisional anti-dumping duties forthwith and that the Joint Committees should have been informed pursuant to Article 27 (2) of the Interim Agreements before adopting provisional measures. The results of the preliminary investigation did, however, show that the dumped imports were causing material injury to the Community industry. The Council notes that in this case any further delays would have considerably increased this injury so that an urgent intervention within the meaning of Article 27 (3) (b).of the Interim Agree- ment was indicated. Upon request, the parties were informed of the essential facts and considerations on the basis of which it was intended to recommend the imposi- tion of definitive duties and the definitive collec- tion of amounts secured by way of a provisional duty. They were also granted a period within which to make representations subsequent to the disclo- sure. - The oral and written comments submitted by the parties were examined and, where appropriate, considered in the Commission’s findings.