Corus Group PLC v. International Trade Commission
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
352 F.3d 1351 (2003)

- Written by Josh Lee, JD
Facts
The United States Trade Representative and the International Trade Commission (ITC) began an investigation into certain steel imports, at the request of the United States Congress. The investigation was conducted under Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974. Following the investigation, four out of the six members of the ITC determined that the steel imports should be divided into two categories, carbon flat rolled steel and tin mill steel products. Only one out of those four determined that imports were causing an injury to the domestic tin mill steel product industry. The other two members of the ITC determined that the imports should not be divided into different markets and should have been considered as a single market of carbon flat rolled steel with tin mill steel products included within the industry. Each of the decisions was issued as a written opinion. The president of the United States (defendant) viewed these decisions as a tie, three to three, with regard to whether the tin mill steel products industry was injured. Therefore, the president imposed three years of tariffs on those imports. A group of foreign steel companies and their United States subsidiaries (plaintiffs) challenged these tariffs in the Court of International Trade. The foreign steel companies argued that the ITC’s vote was not actually a tie and that the ITC decision was not adequately explained. The Court of International Trade rejected these arguments, and the foreign steel companies appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Dyk, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.