[2021] 4 F.C.R. D-10
Anti-dumping
Judicial reviews of decision by Canada Border Services Agency President to terminate dumping investigations for respondent Hyundai Steel Company — Special Import Measures Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. S-15 amended to provide for termination of dumping investigation for any individual exporter with insignificant margin of dumping — This amendment not automatically applying to past final determinations — However, Act, s. 76.1 creating exception, allowing Minister of Finance to request President to review past decisions or portion thereof having regard to rulings, recommendations of World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement Body — In 2020, acting under s. 76.1, Minister requested President to review 2014, 2015 determinations of dumping on basis of original record, not to recalculate margins of dumping determined in original investigations — Whether President’s decision to terminate investigations reasonable — President reasonably interpreted Minister’s request as authorizing review of only a portion of original determinations, as expressly authorized by s. 76.1 — Here, President’s review concerned only specific exporters identified by Minister with respect to recommendations, rulings of Dispute Resolution Body concerning termination of investigations in respect of individual exporters with de minimis margins of dumping — President neither required nor authorized to review final determinations with respect to other individual exporters or to examine other issues — Recalculating margins of dumping or conducting de novo investigation would have been unreasonable because would have gone beyond scope of s. 76.1 review — Open to President to find that s. 76.1 limited-purpose, limited-review provision — S. 76.1 “was not intended as a lever to pry open aspects of a past decision distinct from the rulings and recommendations of the [Dispute Settlement Body] that the review seeks to address” — Limited-purpose nature of S. 76.1 standing on its own, not substantively broadened by transitional provisions of Act — Reasonableness of President’s decision buttressed by appreciation of nature of original determination under Act, s. 41(1) — President’s reasons provided sufficient justification to understand central basis of decision, why main submissions to contrary were rejected — No breach of procedural fairness found in present case — Applications dismissed.
Algoma Tubes Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General) (A-197-20, A-196-20, A-200-20, 2022 FCA 89, Stratas J.A., reasons for judgment dated May 19, 2022, 9 pp.)