ON THIS PAGE:

> Argentina — Footwear (EC)
> Argentina — Textiles and Apparel
> Australia — Salmon

Argentina — Footwear (EC) (WT/DS121/AB/R)     back to top

Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), standard/powers of review (AD 17.6), non-applicability to covered agreements other than Anti-Dumping Agreement such as the SCM and SPS Agreements S.7.1.2

competence (AB)

completion of legal analysis (DSU 17.6) C.4.6

in case of agreement with panel C.4.6

factual basis, contentiousness/omission/insufficiency of facts C.4.6

upholding, modification or reversal of legal findings and conclusions (DSU 17.13), panel finding not appealed and S.1.16.3

competence of panels and AB (DSU 3.2), right to develop own legal reasoning including arguments not adduced by parties (jura novit curia) C.2.4-5

customs unions and free trade areas (GATT XXIV), as exception to GATT provisions (GATT XXIV:5, chapeau), requirements, necessity of measure to establishment of customs union R.1.6.1

GATT 1947, continuing relevance under WTO G.2.1.2

GATT 1994, WTO Agreement, incorporation into (WTO Annex 1A) G.2.1.2

as agreement distinct from GATT 1947 S.1.44.1

interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines

conformity with other Articles C.2.4

effectiveness principle (ut res magis valeat quam pereat/effet utile) I.3.7.5-6

meaning to be attributed to every word and phrase I.3.7.5-6, S.1.44.1

object and purpose I.3.2.5

text/plain language I.3.2.5

interpretation of covered agreements, means, context I.3.2.5

investigation of conditions for safeguard measures, requirements (SG 3.1/SG 4.2(c))

evaluation of all factors S.1.26.1

published report C.2.4

panel reports, rationale, need for (DSU 12.7) P.1.1.3

publication of analysis of case under investigation (SG 4(2)(c)) C.2.4

safeguard measures, characteristics

relationship between Safeguards Agreement and GATT XIX S.1.44.1-2

rules for application of GATT XIX (SG 1) S.1.44.2

safeguard measures, characteristics, relationship between Safeguards Agreement and GATT XIX, continuing applicability of GATT XIX S.1.44.2

safeguard measures, conditions (SG 2)

“is being imported” (SG 2.1), as sudden and recent increase S.1.6.1, S.1.8.1

“such increased quantities”

“as a result of unforeseen developments” (GATT XIX:1(a)) S.1.6.1, S.1.50.1

as pertinent issue of fact and law S.1.50.1

“rate and amount of the increase … in absolute and relative terms” (SG 4.2(a)) S.1.7.1, S.1.29.1

sufficient to cause serious injury or threat S.1.6.1

trends, need to examine S.1.7.1, S.1.29.1

territorial application S.1.5.1

safeguard measures, customs unions and free trade areas (GATT XXIV) exception, applicability R.1.6.1

customs unions S.1.16

safeguard measures, determination of serious injury or threat thereof (SG 4), requirements

evaluation of all relevant factors (SG 4.2(a)) S.1.26.1

“evaluation” S.1.26.1

“serious injury” (SG 4.1(a)) as factor S.1.26.1

safeguard measures, publication obligations (SG 4.2(c)), interpretation by reference to SG 3 (investigation) C.2.4

safeguard measures, standard/powers of review, DSU 11, applicability S.7.1.2-3

standard of review (DSU 11), applicability to Anti-Dumping Agreement subject to AD 17.6 S.7.1.2-3

tax exemption, right to consider treaty provisions not cited by parties C.2.4-5

third party rights W.2.9.1

AB proceedings (WP 24) W.2.9.1

passive participation in oral hearings W.2.9.1

 
Argentina — Textiles and Apparel (WT/DS56/AB/R and Corr. 1)     back to top

abuse of discretion (panel), failure to make objective assessment (DSU 11) E.3.2

due process (dispute settlement proceedings), panel working procedures, need for D.2.2.6

evidence (panel procedures) (DSU 12)

time-limits for submission

absence of provision (DSU 11) E.3.1-2, W.3.6

absence of provision (Working Procedures (Appendix 3)) E.3.1-2

first substantive meeting of panel with parties, relevance E.3.1

panel’s right to admit “late” evidence E.3.1-2

absence of objection by other party E.3.2

time limit for rebuttal E.3.2

as two-stage process E.3.1

presentation of case including facts E.3.1

rebuttal of arguments and evidence E.3.1

information or technical advice, panel’s right to seek (DSU 13), panel’s rights, not to seek S.4.3

International Monetary Fund (IMF)/WTO relationship I.2.1-2

consultations, requirement for (GATT XV:2) I.2.2

exchange measures outside IMF’s jurisdiction, provision of information on request I.2.2

exchange measures within IMF’s jurisdiction, Fund’s duty to inform of consistency in cases involving (IMF-WTO Agreement, para. 8) I.2.2, S.4.3

GATT VIII obligations and I.2.1

interpretation of covered agreements, applicable law, customary rules of interpretation of public international law [as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969)] I.3.1.4

interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines

object and purpose I.3.1.4

ordinary meaning I.3.1.4

interpretation of covered agreements, means, context I.3.1.4

Schedules of Concessions (GATT II)

ordinary customs duties in excess of those provided for in Schedule (GATT II:1(b)) T.1.1.1-2

duty different in type T.1.1.2

standard of review (DSU 11)

“objective assessment of matter before it” E.3.1

failure to make as abuse of discretion E.3.2

Working Procedures (panel) (DSU 12.1 and Appendix 3)

applicable law

panel’s right to determine E.3.1

Working Procedures (DSU Appendix 3) E.3.1

agreement of parties to alternative procedure E.3.1

panel proceedings as two-stage process E.3.1, W.3.6

time-limits, submission of evidence E.3.1-2

 
Australia — Salmon (WT/DS18/AB/R)     back to top

competence (AB)

classification as issue of law or fact, credibility and weight of evidence S.3.3.4

completion of legal analysis (DSU 17.6) C.4.5

in case of disagreement with panel C.4.5

factual basis

contentiousness/omission/insufficiency of facts C.4.5

limitation to panel’s findings or undisputed facts in panel record C.4.5

due process (dispute settlement proceedings), opportunity to respond to evidence/presentations of other parties D.2.2.9-10, E.3.5

EC — Hormones (WT/DS26/AB/R; WT/DS48/AB/R), SPS Agreement, appropriate level of protection (SPS 5.5-5.6), consistency in application (SPS 5.5), distinctions in the level of protection in different situations, comparability S.6.16.2-3

interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines, effectiveness principle (ut res magis valeat quam pereat/effet utile) S.6.1.4

judicial economy J.1.6

“positive solution to dispute” requirement and J.1.6

request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2)

identification of specific measure at issue R.2.3.1

measure actually applied T.6.3.2

measure actually applied R.2.3.1

SPS Agreement, appropriate level of protection (SPS 5.5-5.6)

consistency in application (SPS 5.5)

arbitrary or unjustifiable inconsistencies, exclusion S.6.4.1

discrimination or disguised restriction of trade resulting from inconsistency S.6.17.5-6

absence of risk assessment as evidence of S.6.17.6

degree of difference sufficient to warn of S.6.17.5

distinctions in the level of protection in different situations S.6.16.2-3

measures “not more trade restrictive than required to achieve their appropriate level of … protection” (SPS 5.6) S.6.18.1

“appropriate level”, determination

Member’s obligation S.6.1.4-5

Member’s right S.6.1.1

as preliminary to decision on measure S.6.1.2-3

requirements (SPS 5.6, Footnote 3) S.6.18.1

SPS Agreement, basic rights and obligations (SPS 2)

arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination, exclusion (SPS 2.3) S.6.4

appropriate level of protection and (SPS 5.5) S.6.4.1, S.6.16.2-3

alternative sources of discrimination S.6.4.1

SPS Agreement, risk assessment, need for (SPS 5.1-5.3 and Annex A, para. 4)

ascertainable/theoretical risk distinguished (SPS 5.1) S.6.10.3

elements (Annex 1, para. 4)

evaluation according to SPS measures S.6.11.1, S.6.12.2

evaluation of likelihood of diseases and potential biological and economic consequences S.6.11.1

identification of diseases and potential biological and economic consequences to be protected against S.6.11.1

“likelihood” S.6.12.1-3

“potential”, “likelihood” distinguished S.6.12.1

“sufficient scientific evidence” requirement (SPS 2.2) and S.6.3.3

SPS Agreement, sufficient scientific evidence, need for (SPS 2.2) S.6.3.3

standard of review (DSU 11), “objective assessment of the facts”, evidence, alleged disregard or distortion by panel, independence in evaluating S.7.3.5

Working Procedures (panel) (DSU 12.1 and Appendix 3), high quality reports/avoidance of delay, flexibility in achieving balance (DSU 12.2) D.2.2.9, E.3.5

The texts reproduced here do not have the legal standing of the original documents which are entrusted and kept at the WTO Secretariat in Geneva.