Judicial Appeal of Anti-Dumping Decisions in Egypt

The Egyptian legal system is distinguished by a notable institutional feature: the right to judicially appeal decisions imposing anti-dumping or safeguard duties issued by the Minister of Trade and Industry. According to the jurisprudence of the Administrative Judiciary, such decisions are considered final administrative acts that may be appealed before the Administrative Court of the State Council by all affected parties, whether importers, producers, exporters, or distributors.

Judicial Oversight Guarantee

This judicial oversight constitutes a real guarantee for the legitimacy of anti-dumping decisions in Egypt, as the court has the right to examine:

• The extent of compliance with essential legal procedures.
• The existence of a sound technical and economic basis for the decision.
• Respect for the principle of confrontation and transparency in investigations.
• The proportionality between the adopted measure and the actual harm.

This guarantee is considered a relatively advanced regulatory feature compared to several countries that immunize their decisions or make appeals complex and limited in effect.

Judicial Precedents Affirming the Role of the Administrative Judiciary in Egypt

Egypt has already witnessed several landmark rulings by administrative courts regarding appeals against safeguard and anti-dumping duties, most notably:

1. Suspension of Safeguard Duty on Billet Imports – 2019:
The Administrative Court suspended the execution of Minister of Trade and Industry Decree No. 346 of 2019, which imposed a 15% safeguard duty on billet (iron ore) imports. The judgment was based on the absence of a sound technical foundation and the failure to consider the economic impact on rolling mills, which was deemed a direct threat to industrial balance.

2. Appeal No. 3216 of Judicial Year 48 (Supreme Administrative Court) – Anti-Dumping Duty on Chinese Bulbs:

A company appealed the imposition of an 80% anti-dumping duty on electric bulbs from China. Although the appeal was rejected, the case clearly illustrated the effectiveness of judicial oversight and the right of affected parties to seek court review of the legitimacy of technical decisions.

These rulings demonstrate that judicial appeals of anti-dumping decisions in Egypt are not merely theoretical, but serve as an effective mechanism for maintaining balance between trade protection and competition and reviewing the legality of administrative discretion.

Egypt is also distinguished by the possibility of swift judicial suspension of decisions in some cases, based on the plaintiff’s request, pending a final judgment, if the appeal is deemed serious and urgent—a request that has been accepted in several precedents.

Conclusion

The guarantee of judicial appeal against anti-dumping decisions in Egypt is a fundamental pillar for consolidating the legitimacy of trade policy. It not only provides a route for grievance, but also reinforces the role of administrative courts as institutional actors preserving the balance between protection and economic freedom, especially in the context of improving the investment climate.

However, this guarantee alone is insufficient to address structural legal shortcomings or to compensate for the lack of prior institutional controls, as judicial review always comes after the fact, allowing decisions to be implemented for months or years before being overturned or suspended.

Therefore, comprehensive reform is required, including amending the law to incorporate an independent review mechanism and linking the imposition of duties to a thorough analysis of their effects on the market and consumers.

Frequently Asked Questions

To find out more, please fill out the form or email us at: info@eg.Andersen.com

Contact Us