In its original complaint. CESA claimed that the Community industry suffered both injury (in the Community market) and adverse trade effects (in third country markets) within the meaning of Article 2(3) and Atticle 2(4) of the TBR, respectively.

　

It was further alleged, in the original complaint, that the Community industry suffered injury and adverse trade effects caused by subsidies given to Korean shipbuilding companies by the Republic of Korea in violation of Articles 3 and 5 of the ASCM. Pursuant to Article 5 of the ASCM, subsidies are actionable if they cause "adverse effects" to the interests of other Members of the ASCM. Such adverse effects can. inter alia, take the form of "injury" under Article 5(a) of the ASCM or "scrious prejudice" under Article 5(c) of the ASCM to the Community industry.

　

In accordance with footnote 11 of the ASCM, the term "injury" is used in the same sense as for countervailing investigation proceedings requiring an analysis of the domestic Community market under Article 15 of the ASCM; on the other hand a "serious prejudice" analysis is to be made under Article 6 of the ASCM with respect to any market.

　

As established in the original investigation, the updating investigation confirmed that the market for commercial vessels is a world market. Indeed, all shipyards compete for the same clients throughout the world, and so the notion of domestic and export markets or of imports is virtually meaningless. Furthemore, market data available from independent sources, such as the Lloyd's Register of Shipping, do not distinguish among geographical markets in the absence of "imports" of vessels into a particular market. An effort to define a separate "Community" market would, therefore, be neither realistic nor possible. Finally, all interested parties confirmed that it is indeed their understanding that the commercial vessels market is a world market.

　

The reference to a world market for the injury analysis within the meaning of footnote 11 of the ASCM is therefore confirmed.

　

The co-operating Community producers represented, during the first investigation period, 44% of the total orders of commercial vessels for all Community shipyards, which was deemed sufficient to represent the Community industry within the meaning of Article 2(5) of the TBR. During the current investigation period (from 1 December 2000 to 31 December 2001), they represented 48% of the total Community orders and accordingly still represent the Community industry within the meaning of the above mentioned Article.

　

The updating investigation confirmed that data on world wide new orders are the most appropriate way to reflect the actual situation on the market, namely due to the fact that the market for commercial vessels is a world market. Consequently no distinction was made between the Community market and third country markets. The order statistics are published on a quarterly basis by Lloyd's Register of Shipping and could consequently not be obtained for the current investigation period (covering a period of 13 months). The following analysis is therefore based on calendar years.

　

As can be seen from the above table, the year 2001 has been characterised by a downturn in new orders (of around 20%) compared to the year 2000. This is however explained by an exceptionally high rate of ordering in 2000 rather than by a lower activity. Despite this downturn, the total volume of new orders in 2001 remajns the second highest recorded in the last decade. The high rate of ordering in 2000 is explained by a favourable situation on major shipping markets combined with a generally low level of prices. It can also be attributed partially to the impact of the end of the European operating subsidy scheme⁴. As a matter of fact, the various Community shipyards have been particularly active at year end in order to get the last available state aids, which had the effect of boosting the Community orders.

　

The above table shows that between the years 2000 and 2001 the new orders in the bulk carriers and containership sectors significantly decreased, which is, for the latter, mainly explained by a peak level of ordering in 2000. The market for the product and chemical tankers and for the LNGs significantly expanded between the years 2000 and 2001, while the demand in the other sectors remained more or less stable:

　

The growth in orders for LNGs sector was especially remarkable since it went from 178 000 CGT ordered world-wide in 1998 (representing 1% of all ship types new orders) to 2 197 000 CGT ordered in 2001 (representing 9% of all ship types new orders). This is a twelve-fold increase in new orders in only four years. Even if no such significant growth is further expected in this segment of the market, the level of new orders should remain quite stable in the coming years.