 |
|
|
 |
|
|
| home > trade topics > dispute settlement > appellate body > repertory > index e-f |
|
|
SUBJECT INDEX BY CASE: APPELLATE BODY REPORTS E-F |
|
> EC — Asbestos |
amicus curiae briefs Additional Procedure (EC — Asbestos) A.2.3.0, W.2.2.1, W.2.6.6 adoption under AB/WP 16(1) A.2.3.1.1-5, W.2.6.6 failure to comply with Additional Procedure as ground for rejection A.2.3.4 request for views A.2.3.1.1, W.2.6.6 text A.2.3.1.2 appellate review (DSU 17), extension of deadline for circulation W.2.10.2.3 competence (AB) completion of legal analysis (DSU 17.6) C.4.11-12 factual basis contentiousness/omission/insufficiency of facts C.4.11-12 insufficient argument of novel issue C.4.12 issues of law/legal interpretations (DSU 17.6) C.4.12 evidence (GATT XX: justification), scientific sources representing divergent opinion G.3.3.1 expert evidence, divergence of views, relevance G.3.3.1 General Exceptions (GATT XX) alternative WTO-consistent measure, availability G.3.4.1 measures necessary to protect human, animal or plant life or health (GATT XX(b)) GATT III:4 (national treatment, regulatory discrimination) and G.3.2.0, N.1.12 justification evidence of health risks, relevance G.3.2.1, N.1.12.1 good faith reliance on G.3.3.1 scientific sources representing divergent opinion G.3.3.1 “preponderant” evidence G.3.3.1 measures relating to the conservation of exhaustible natural resources (GATT XX(g)), GATT III:4 (national treatment, regulatory discrimination) and G.3.2.1 good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VC 26)), scientific evidence, reliance on G.3.3.1 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)], defences and exceptions, GATT XX G.3.2.1, N.1.12.1 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines effectiveness principle (ut res magis valeat quam pereat/effet utile) G.3.2.1, N.1.12.1 multiple authentic languages (VC 33) N.1.9.1.2 object and purpose N.1.9.2.3 same or closely related phrases in different agreements N.1.3.1.4, N.1.9.1.1 interpretation of covered agreements, means context, GATT III:1/GATT III as a whole N.1.1.4 dictionaries N.1.9.1.2 multiple authentic languages N.1.9.1.2 judicial economy N.1.11.7 “like product” (GATT III:2) directly competitive or substitutable products distinguished (Ad Note) N.1.3.1.4 GATT III:4 distinguished N.1.3.1.4, N.1.9.1.1 “like product” (GATT III:4) competitive relationship, need for N.1.9.3.2, N.1.9.4.4, N.1.9.5.1 evidence of health risks, relevance G.3.2.1, N.1.9.5.2, N.1.12.1 criteria N.1.9.4 consumer preferences N.1.9.1.2, N.1.9.4.1, N.1.9.4.4, N.1.9.4.7, N.1.9.5.2 end-uses N.1.9.4.1-8 interchangeability N.1.9.4.4, N.1.9.4.6 physical properties N.1.9.4.1-4 tariff classification N.1.9.4.1 determination on basis of all the available evidence N.1.9.4.1-2 on case by case basis N.1.9.1.2 GATT III:2 distinguished N.1.3.1.4, N.1.9.1.1 “similar” / “produits similaires” / “productos similares” N.1.9.1.2 national treatment, general principle (GATT III:1) interpretation of GATT III as a whole and GATT III:1 as context N.1.9.2.1-3 GATT III:4 (“like” product) and N.1.1.4, N.1.9.2 “so as to afford protection” N.1.1.4 equality of competitive conditions N.1.9.2.3 “less favourable treatment” and N.1.11.7 national treatment, regulatory discrimination (GATT III:4) GATT XX and G.3.2.0, G.3.2.1, N.1.12 general principle (GATT III:1) and N.1.1.4, N.1.9.2 “less favourable treatment” N.1.11.7 “so as to afford protection”, equality of competitive conditions N.1.9.2.3 tax discrimination (GATT III:2) provisions distinguished N.1.3.1.4, N.1.9.1.1, N.1.9.2.1-2, N.1.9.3.1 non-violation claims (GATT XXIII:1(b)) “any measure” N.2.2.1 as exceptional remedy N.2.1.1 measure in “conflict” with GATT provisions, applicability to N.2.2.1 concurrent application to measures falling under other provisions of GATT N.2.2.1 standard of review (DSU 11) “objective assessment of the facts” evidence, alleged disregard or distortion by panel discretion in assessment of evidence E.3.5A independence in evaluating S.7.3.12A TBT Agreement “technical regulation” (Annex 1.1) T.4.1.1-5 identifiability requirement T.4.1.4-5 third party rights W.2.9.2 AB proceedings (WP 24) W.2.9.2 passive participation in oral hearings W.2.9.2 Working Procedures (appellate review) concurring opinion (WP 3.2) W.2.3 working schedule (WP 26), extension of deadline for circulation of AB report, exceptional workload W.2.10.2.3 administrative instruments, right to challenge P.5.3.1 Agreement on Agriculture (AG) GATT 1994 and (AG 21.1) A.1.37 dispute settlement and A.1.37.2 market access concessions and commitments (AG 4.1) and A.1.8.2, A.1.37.2 primacy of AG A.1.37.1 Modalities Paper and A.1.37A.1 object and purpose, agricultural reform A.1.8.1 appellate review (DSU 17), legal issues and interpretations, limitation to (DSU 17.6) P.3.4.2 competence (AB) classification as issue of law or fact de facto discrimination S.3.3.2 market shares S.3.3.2 nationality of majority of operators S.3.3.2 ownership, control and nationality of company S.3.3.2 procedural and administrative requirements, differences S.3.3.2 issues of law/legal interpretations (DSU 17.6), legal representation in government delegation, importance P.4.2 compliance, request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2) R.2.1.3, T.6.1.3 consultations (DSU 4), due process, disclosure obligation T.6.1.3 DSU, applicability, market access concessions and commitments (AG 4.1)/GATT 1994, consistency A.1.37.2 GATS, applicability (GATS I) G.1.1.1-2 GATT 1994, overlap G.1.1.2, G.2.2.2 “measures affecting trade in services” (GATS I:1) G.1.1.1 “production, distribution, marketing, sale and delivery of a service” G.1.1.1 services in any sector except services supplied in the exercise of government authority (GATS I:3(b)) G.1.1.1 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines absence of provision, relevance A.1.37.2 legitimate expectations, relevance N.3.1 narrow/broad interpretation, waivers W.1.3 ordinary meaning G.1.1.1 same or closely related phrases in different agreements G.1.1.1, L.2.4, M.2.2.1 interpretation of covered agreements, means Lomé Convention L.3 preamble of agreement under consideration L.2.1-2 preparatory work, Agreement on Agriculture (AG) A.1.37.2 title L.2.1-2 interpretation of covered agreements, phrases “affecting” GATS I G.1.1.1 interpretation of covered agreements, specific terms and phrases, “neutral in application and administered in a fair and equitable manner” (LA 1.3)/ “administer in a uniform, impartial and reasonable manner” (GATT X:3(a)), equivalence L.2.4 legal representation in government delegation, importance P.4.2 Licensing Agreement L.2.1-2, L.2.4 as lex specialis L.2.4 licensing procedures, limitation to (LA, title, preamble and Art. 1.1) L.2.1-2 “neutral in application and administered in a fair and equitable manner” (LA 1.3)/ “administer in a uniform, impartial and reasonable manner” (GATT X:3(a)), equivalence L.2.4 Lomé Convention, panel’s right to refer to L.3 market access concessions and commitments (AG 4.1) consistency with GATT XIII A.1.8.2, A.1.37.2, A.1.38.9 dispute settlement A.1.37.2 fundamental nature A.1.8.1 MFN treatment (GATS II) M.2.2.1-2 determination of violation, requirements, aims and effects test, GATT III:1 distinguished M.2.2.2 “treatment no less favourable” (GATS II:1) M.2.2.1 de facto discrimination M.2.2.1 GATS XVII (national treatment) distinguished M.2.2.1 MFN treatment (GATT I) M.2.1.1 “advantage” (GATT I:1) M.2.1.1 de facto discrimination M.2.1.1 as finding of fact S.3.3.2 national treatment, general principle (GATT III:1) “so as to afford protection” equality of competitive conditions, protection of competitive relationship N.3.1 GATS II and XVII distinguished N.1.13.1 omission from GATT III:2, first sentence, relevance N.1.11.2 national treatment, regulatory discrimination (GATT III:4) “less favourable treatment” N.1.11.1-2 national treatment, services and service suppliers (GATS XVII), determination of violation, requirements, aims and effects test, GATT III:1 distinguished M.2.2.2, N.1.13.1 national treatment, tax discrimination (GATT III:2) “not similarly taxed”, threshold/de minimis differential N.3.1 “so as to afford protection” N.1.11.2 intention, relevance M.2.2.2, N.1.13.1 non-discriminatory administration of quantitative restrictions (GATT XIII) T.2.1-4 allocation to Members not having a substantial interest (GATT XIII:1) T.2.1 distribution of trade as close as possible to expected shares in absence of restrictions as aim (GATT XIII:2, chapeau) T.2.2 publication and administration of trade regulations (GATT X:3(a)) P.5.3 regulatory regimes established by Member, relevance T.2.3 non-retroactivity of treaties (VC 28) P.3.4.2 continuing measures P.3.4.2 as general principle of international law P.3.4.2 non-violation claims (GATT XXIII:1(b)), de minimis effects, relevance N.3.1 notice of appeal, requirements (AB/WP 20(2)), statement of allegations of errors on issues of law/legal interpretations (AB/WP 20(2)(d)) W.2.7.3.1 private counsel, participation in DSU proceedings P.4 publication and administration of trade regulations (GATT X:3(a)) T.2.4 publication and administration of trade regulations (GATT X), laws, regulations, judicial decisions and administrative rulings, uniform, impartial and reasonable administration (GATT X:3) P.5.3.0, T.2.4 request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2) compliance, importance of parties’ responsibility R.2.1.3, T.6.1.3 scrutiny by DSB R.2.1.3 fruitfulness of action, determination by Member R.5.2 legal basis of claim R.2.2.1-4 arguments distinguished C.1.2-4, R.2.2.1-4, W.3.1 rectification at subsequent stages, arguments in written or other submission or statement C.1.3-4, R.2.2.3, T.6.2.2-3, W.3.1 summary, sufficiency, listing of paragraphs of agreement allegedly breached T.6.2.1 Schedules of Concessions (GATT II) diminishment of obligations, exclusion T.1.3.1 as integral part of GATT 1994 (WTO II:2) T.1.3.1 standing/right to bring claim (DSU 3.7) enforcement of WTO rules as justification R.5.3 fruitfulness of resort to dispute settlement procedures R.5.2 legal interest, relevance R.5.1 self-regulating nature of provision R.5.2 terms of reference of panels (DSU 7), request for establishment of panel as basis R.2.1.3, T.6.1.3 waivers exceptional nature W.1.3 GATT I/GATT XIII waivers, relationship W.1.1 Working Procedures (appellate review) composition of delegation legal representation, importance P.4.2 Member’s right to determine W.2.6.1 oral hearing (WP 27), change of date W.2.11.1.1 working schedule (WP 26) modification in exceptional circumstances at request of parties, participants or third participants (WP 16.2) W.2.10.1.1 oral hearing W.2.11.1.1 Working Procedures (panel) (DSU 12.1 and Appendix 3), preliminary rulings, desirability W.3.1 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), determination of dumping (AD 2) calculation of administrative, selling and general costs and profits (AD 2.2.2) “weighted average” (AD 2.2.2(ii)) A.3.11.1-2 need for more than one exporter or producer A.3.11.1 sales not in the ordinary course of trade (“actual amounts incurred and realized”) A.3.11.2 calculation of dumping margins (AD 2.4) actual product under investigation/type or model, distinction A.3.14.1 comparison of weighted average normal value with weighted average of all comparable export transactions A.3.14.2 “like product” / “comparable” equation A.3.14.3 “zeroing”, negative differences and A.3.14.2 sales transaction not “in the ordinary course of trade”, weighted average (AD 2.2.2(ii)) and A.3.11.2 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), standard/powers of review (AD 17.6), interpretation of relevant provisions of AD (AD 17.6(ii)), “admits of more than one permissible interpretation” A.3.60.1 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines multiple permissible interpretations A.3.60.1 benefit of doubt to challenged measure A.3.60.1 specific action against dumping (AD 18.1) or subsidy (SCM 32.1) A.3.60.1 Working Procedures (appellate review), working schedule (WP 26), modification in exceptional circumstances at request of parties, participants or third participants (WP 16.2) W.2.10.1.3
Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), determination of injury (AD 3) calculation of volume of dumped imports A.3.7 calculation of “all other” anti-dumping rate (AD 9.4), relevance A.3.44 method, freedom to choose A.3.18.1-3 “positive evidence” / “objective examination” requirement (AD 3.1) A.3.7.1, A.3.18.1-3 AD 2.1, relevance A.3.7.1 AD 9.4, relevance A.3.44.1, A.3.44.3 AD 17.6(ii), relevance A.3.60.4 country by country analysis/cumulative assessment of volume and prices (AD 3.3), “positive evidence” / “objective examination” requirement (AD 3.1) A.3.21.1 evaluation of injury factors (AD 3.4) manner of evaluating causal relationship (AD 3.5) injurious effects of dumped goods and of other factors, need to distinguish (AD 3.5) A.3.24.6 non-attribution to dumped imports of injury caused by other factors (AD 3.5) A.3.24.6 “positive evidence” / “objective examination” requirement (AD 3.1) calculation of volume of dumped imports A.3.7.1, A.3.44.1, A.3.44.2 country by country analysis/cumulative assessment of volume and prices (AD 3.3) A.3.21.1 “objective examination” extrapolation of examined producer/exporter findings to non-examined producers/exporters (AD 6.10) A.3.19.3-6 proportional attribution between examined and non-examined producers/exporters A.3.19.5-6 “positive”, in case of producers/exporters examined individually A.3.19.1 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), evidentiary rules (AD 6) applicability, AD as whole A.3.29.1 due process A.3.29.1 individual examination of all producers, alternatives in case of impracticability (AD 6.12) A.3.37 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), imposition and collection of anti-dumping duties (AD 9) calculation of “all other” anti-dumping duty rate (AD 9.4) calculation of volume of dumped imports (AD 3), relevance A.3.44 as exception to AD 9.3 A.3.44.2 prior determination of dumping margins, injury and causal link, need for (AD 9.1) A.3.39.1 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), standard/powers of review (AD 17.6)3 assessment of the facts (AD 17.6(i)) A.3.59.8-9 substitution of panel’s own assessment, exclusion A.3.58.5 “unbiased and objective” A.3.58.5 authorities’ establishment of facts (AD 17.6(i)), “proper” A.3.58.5 discretionary powers A.3.59.9 “facts made available” (AD 17.5(ii)), requirement to seek information, whether A.3.59.8 interpretation of relevant provisions of AD (AD 17.6(ii)) in accordance with customary rules of interpretation of public international law A.3.60.4 “admits of more than one permissible interpretation” A.3.58.5, A.3.60.4 objective assessment, relevance A.3.60.4 due process (investigation of dumping (AD 6)) A.3.29.1 final resolution of dispute, adoption of panel or AB report by DSB (DSU 16.4, 19.2, 21 and 22) R.4.3.4-5 implementation of recommendations and rulings of the DSB (DSU 21.3), prompt compliance (DSU 21.1) R.4.3.4 information or technical advice, panel’s right to seek (DSU 13), panel’s rights, not to seek S.4.14 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)], AD 17.6(ii) A.3.60.4 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines grammar, respect for A.3.39.1 multiple authentic languages (VC 33) I.3.11.2 presumption of same meaning (VC 33(3)) I.3.11.2 multiple permissible interpretations A.3.58.5, A.3.60.4 panel reports adoption by DSB (DSU 16.4) as final resolution of dispute R.4.3.4 unappealed panel finding and R.4.3.4-6 review of implementation of DSB rulings (DSU 21.5) R.4.1.3-4 finality of panel/AB report and R.4.3.4-5 unappealed panel reports and R.4.3.4-5 “measures taken to comply” R.4.1.3-4 “matter” legal basis of claim/consistency of measure R.4.1.3-4 measure taken to comply, existence R.4.1.3-4 as new claim/reassertion of old R.4.2.3-4, R.4.3.6 specific action against dumping (AD 18.1) or subsidy (SCM 32.1) A.3.60.4 standard of review (DSU 11), “objective assessment of the facts”, evidence, alleged disregard or distortion by panel, independence in evaluating S.7.3.16-17 due process (dispute settlement proceedings), prejudice to party, need for D.2.2.7, R.2.3.7 interpretation of covered agreements, applicable law, Schedules of Concessions I.3.5.4-5, T.1.2.1 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines Harmonized System of Customs Classification and Explanatory Notes T.1.2.2 legitimate expectations, relevance I.3.5.4-5 specific language, need for I.3.5.4 tariff concessions in Member’s schedule and I.3.5.4, T.1.2.1, T.1.2.6 unilateral nature of I.3.5.4, T.1.2.1 object and purpose R.2.3.6, T.1.2.1 parties’ intentions (VC 31(1)), common intention I.3.5.4, I.3.10.4, T.1.2.1, T.1.5.1-2 text/plain language, legitimate expectations and I.3.5.4 interpretation of covered agreements, means context, historical background to conclusion of treaty I.3.10.3 preparatory work, classification practice I.3.10.3-5, T.1.2.3-5, T.1.5.2-3 supplementary means (VC 32) I.3.10.2-5 in case of ambiguity I.3.10.2 World Customs Organization decisions T.1.2.2 “measure”, DSU 6.2, application of tariffs as R.2.3.4 request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2) identification of specific measure at issue R.2.3.4-7 identification of product, need for R.2.3.5-6 objective and purpose of DSU 6.2 as test R.2.3.6 Schedules of Concessions (GATT II) T.1.2.1-2 as integral part of GATT 1994 (WTO II:2) I.3.5.4-5, T.1.2.1-2 interpretation and clarification T.1.2 applicable law I.3.5.4-5, T.1.2.1, T.1.5.1 circumstances of conclusion (VC 32) T.1.2.3 verification of tariff schedules T.1.2.7 World Customs Organization decisions and T.1.2.2 World Customs Organization (WCO), decisions as aid to interpretation of Schedules of Tariff Concessions T.1.2.2 Agreement on Agriculture (AG) export competition commitments (AG 8), compliance with both AG and Schedule of Commitments, need for A.1.14B.1-2, T.1.4.1 GATT 1994 and (AG 21.1) A.1.37.3-4, A.1.38.15, S.2.19.4 primacy of AG A.1.37.4, T.1.4.1 interpretation, guidelines same or closely related phrases in same agreement A.1.5A.1 text/plain language A.1.14B.1, A.1.17.3 Modalities Paper and A.1.37A.2 object and purpose, substantial progressive reductions in agricultural support and protection A.1.5A.3-4 Schedules of Commitments (AG 3) conformity with AG, need for A.1.14B.1-2, T.1.4.1 as integral part of GATT 1994 (AG 3.1) A.1.4A.1, A.1.37.4 primacy of AG (AG 21) A.1.6.3-4, T.1.4.1 burden of proof reversal in respect of circumvention of export subsidy commitments (AG 10.3), DSU 6.2 requirements distinguished A.1.34A.1 reversal in respect of presumption of nullification or impairment (DSU 3.8) N.3.2-3 competence (AB) completion of legal analysis (DSU 17.6) competence (AB), in absence of full argumentation of legal issues A.1.38.15, C.4.27 factual basis insufficiency A.1.38.15, C.4.27, S.2.19.5 limitation to panel’s findings or undisputed facts in panel record C.4.27 issues of law/legal interpretations (DSU 17.6) issues not examined by panel C.4.27 new arguments S.3.1.7 domestic support commitments (AG 6) domestic support/export subsidy regimes, need to maintain distinction (AG 3) A.1.36.2 spill-over effect of permitted domestic support A.1.36.2 footnotes, status A.1.37.4 due process (dispute settlement proceedings), full argumentation of issues, need for A.1.38.15, C.4.27 estoppel good faith engagement in dispute settlement procedures (DS 3.10) and P.3.1.16, P.3.7.2 relevance in WTO dispute settlement P.3.7.1-2 export subsidy commitments (AG 9) “contingent on export performance” (AG 9.1(a)) A.1.16A.1 “export subsidy commitments” (AG 3.1) A.1.4A.1 “commitments limiting subsidization” A.1.4B levels (AG 9.2), “budgetary outlays … and the quantities benefiting from such subsidies”, as linked requirements (AG 9.2(b)(iv)) A.1.5A.1, A.1.14D.1, A.1.29A.1 “reduction commitments” budgetary outlay commitments (AG 9.2(a)(i)) A.1.14D quantity commitments (AG 9.2(a)(ii)) A.1.14D “subject to reduction commitments”, applicability to AG 9.1 subsidies A.1.14D export subsidy, definition, “contingent upon export performance” (AG 1(e)/SCM 3.1(a)), measure falling within AG 9 A.1.3.4, A.1.14C.1, A.1.17.4 export subsidy, prohibition (AG 3.3) in excess of budgetary outlay and quantity commitment level (AG 3.3) A.1.4B.1 budgetary outlay and quantity commitment levels A.1.5A.1-4 “commitments limiting subsidization” (AG 3.1) and A.1.4B good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VC 26)), dispute settlement procedures, engagement in (DSU 3.10), estoppel and P.3.1.16 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)] A.1.4A.1, T.1.5.4 Schedules of Concessions A.1.4A.1, T.1.5.4 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines object and purpose, preamble as evidence of A.1.5A.2 same or closely related phrases in same agreement A.1.5A.1 text/plain language A.1.14B.1, A.1.17.3 judicial economy, “positive solution to dispute” requirement and J.1.21, S.2.19.4, S.7.7.2 notice of appeal, requirements (AB/WP 20(2)), statement of allegations of errors on issues of law/legal interpretations (AB/WP 20(2)(d)), summary of contested conclusion and related findings and interpretations W.2.7.3.4 nullification or impairment (DSU 3.8) adverse impact as N.3.2-3 presumption in case of inconsistency with covered agreement N.3.2-3 payments on export of agricultural product financed by virtue of governmental action (AG 9.1(c)) actual average cost including fixed and variable costs A.1.20.12-13 benchmark/standard (AG 9.1(c)), independent enquiry into existence of benefit, relevance A.1.3.4 “by virtue of” government control, relevance A.1.26.10 nexus, need for A.1.26.9 regulatory framework, relevance A.1.26.10 cost of production, failure to recoup as A.1.20.11-13 cross-subsidization and A.1.20.13, A.1.28.2-3 “financed”, “whether or not a charge on the public account” A.1.27.7 “governmental action”, determination on case-by-case basis A.1.26.11 “on the export” A.1.28.3 “payments” transfer of economic resources, need for A.1.17.3 distinct entities, relevance A.1.17.3, A.1.28.2 payments by private parties as A.1.26.9, A.1.27.7 request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2), reversal of burden of proof (AG 10.3) and A.1.34A.1 Schedules of Concessions (GATT II) interpretation and clarification applicable law A.1.4A.1, T.1.5.4 footnotes, status A.1.37.4, T.1.4.1 SCM Agreement dispute settlement (SCM 30), special or additional rules and procedures (DSU 1.2 and Appendix 2), SCM 4.7 (recommendation for withdrawal of subsidy) J.1.21, S.2.19.4, S.7.7.2 “withdrawal of subsidy without delay” (SCM 4.7), time-limits, insufficiency of facts in panel report for AB to specify A.1.38.15, C.4.27, S.2.19.5 standard of review (DSU 11) obligation to make recommendation, whether, SCM 4.7 and J.1.21, S.2.19.4-5, S.7.7.2 “such other findings as will assist the DSB” J.1.21, S.7.7.1-2 judicial economy and J.1.21, S.2.19.4, S.7.7.2 standing/right to bring claim (DSU 3.7), fruitfulness of resort to dispute settlement procedures P.3.7.2 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.7.1.1 appellate review (DSU 17), extension of deadline for circulation W.2.10.2.1 burden of proof B.3.1.3 defences and exceptions B.3.3.3 measures which result in a higher level of protection than international standards (SPS 3.3) B.3.3.3 onus probandi actori incumbit as general principle of evidence B.3.1.3 defences/exceptions and B.3.3.3 prima facie case B.3.2.2 panel ruling in favour, need for B.3.2.2 standard of proof B.3.2.2 procedures, modification W.3.3 competence (AB) classification as issue of law or fact compliance/consistency with treaty obligations S.3.3.3, S.7.3.1 credibility and weight of evidence S.3.3.3, S.7.3.1 completion of legal analysis (DSU 17.6) C.4.3-4 in case of disagreement with panel C.4.3-4 factual basis, contentiousness/omission/insufficiency of facts C.4.3-4 issues of law/legal interpretations (DSU 17.6) alleged failure of panel to make objective assessment (DSU 11) S.3.2.1 issues not raised by parties C.4.3 competence (panels), objections, requirements, specificity/explicitness O.1.1 competence of panels and AB (DSU 3.2), right to develop own legal reasoning including arguments not adduced by parties (jura novit curia) C.2.1 de novo review of facts, exclusion S.7.2.1 due process (dispute settlement proceedings), panel’s discretion on matters of procedure (DSU 12.1 and Appendix 3) D.2.2.2-3, O.1.1 expert evidence divergence of views, relevance S.6.14.4 multiple complainants and (DSU 9.2) M.4.1-2 information or technical advice, panel’s right to seek (DSU 13) expert evidence (DSU 13.2), individual advice, right to seek S.4.1-2 panel’s rights not to seek S.7.3.3 to establish group of experts S.4.1, W.3.2 to make ad hoc rules S.4.2, W.3.2 information or technical advice, panel’s right to seek (SPS 11.2), panel’s right to establish group of experts S.4.1 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)], SPS P.3.5.1 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines presumption of consistency (SPS 3.2) S.6.6.1, S.6.6.3 text/plain language I.3.2.2 interpretation of covered agreements, means context, treaty/treaties as a whole S.6.14.2, S.6.17.1, S.6.17.2 in dubio mitius principle I.3.8.0, S.6.6.2 definition I.3.8.1 as supplementary means of interpretation I.3.8.1 preamble of agreement under consideration P.3.5.1 supplementary means (VC 32) I.3.8.1 judicial economy J.1.4 multiple complainants (DSU 9) harmonization of panels and timetables (DSU 9.2), joint meeting with experts M.4.1-2 participation in panel proceedings initiated by another complainant D.2.2.3, M.4.3 non-retroactivity of treaties (VC 28), continuing measures T.5.2.1 notice of appeal, requirements (AB/WP 20(2)) statement of allegations of errors on issues of law/legal interpretations (AB/WP 20(2)(d)) allegation of panel’s failure to make objective assessment (DSU 11), need for specific reference S.3.2.1 legal argument in support of claim distinguished S.3.2.1 precautionary principle P.3.5 customary international environmental law, as principle of S.6.23.1 customary international law, whether P.3.5.1, S.6.23.1 SPS and consistency of measures with SPS agreement, need for S.6.23.1 measures which result in a higher level of protection than international standards (SPS 3.3) P.3.5.1 provisional application of SPS measures (SPS 5.7) and P.3.5.1, S.6.23 SPS preamble P.3.5.1 SPS Agreement, appropriate level of protection (SPS 5.5-5.6) consistency in application (SPS 5.5) S.6.15 arbitrary or unjustifiable inconsistencies, exclusion S.6.15.1-2 discrimination or disguised restriction of trade resulting from inconsistency S.6.15.2, S.6.17.1, S.6.17.2-3 distinctions in the level of protection in different situations S.6.16.1 comparability S.6.16.1 legal obligation, whether S.6.15.1 SPS Agreement, basic rights and obligations (SPS 2) arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination, exclusion (SPS 2.3) appropriate level of protection and (SPS 5.5) S.6.15.1-2, S.6.16.1 alternative sources of discrimination S.6.17.3-4 as balance between promotion of international trade and protection of human, animal or plant life or health S.6.3.1, S.6.5.2 risk assessment (SPS 5.1) and S.6.9.1 underlying nature of provision S.6.2.1, S.6.3.2 SPS Agreement, harmonization of measures (SPS 3) burden of proof, SPS measures S.6.7.1-2 general rule/exception relationship (SPS 3.1 and 3.2), whether S.6.8.1-3 interpretation of covered agreements, means footnotes to treaty S.6.8.4 preamble of agreement under consideration S.6.8.2 measures based on international standards (SPS 3.1) S.6.6 “based on” S.6.6.1 burden of proof S.6.6.3 measures which conform to international standards (SPS 3.2) S.6.7 burden of proof S.6.7.1-2 incorporation into municipal law S.6.7.2 presumption of consistency S.6.6.1, S.6.6.3, S.6.7.2 measures which result in a higher level of protection (SPS 3.3) S.6.8 consistency with other SPS Articles including SPS 5.1-8 S.6.8.4 Members’ right to choose S.6.5.1 risk assessment, need for (SPS 3.3, Footnote 2 and SPS 5.1) S.6.8.4 scientific justification, need for S.6.8.4 SPS preamble and S.6.8.2 municipal law, incorporation of international SPS standard S.6.7.2 SPS Agreement, interpretation applicability to pre-existing situations and measures T.5.2.1 customary rules of interpretation of public international law [as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969)] and P.3.5.1 preamble as aid S.6.8.2 SPS Agreement, risk assessment, need for (SPS 5.1-5.3 and Annex A, para. 4) ascertainable/theoretical risk distinguished (SPS 5.1) S.6.10.1-2 quantitative threshold, relevance S.6.14.1 assessment prepared other than by Member concerned, acceptability (SPS 5.1 and Annex 1, para. 4) S.6.9.5 balance of SPS interests and (SPS 5.1) S.6.9.1 elements (Annex 1, para. 4), “potential”, “probable” distinguished S.6.9.4 measures based on, need for (SPS 5.1) S.6.14.1-2 rational relationship between measure and risk, need for S.6.14.2, S.6.14.4 risk management distinguished (SPS 5.1 and Annex 1, para. 4) S.6.9.3 “scientific justification” (SPS 2.3) and S.6.8.4-5 specificity of assessment, need for (SPS 5.1 and 5.2) S.6.13.1-2 “sufficient scientific evidence” requirement (SPS 2.2) and S.6.3.1-2, S.6.9.1-2, S.6.14.2 divergence of expert views, relevance S.6.14.4 two-step process, acceptability (Annex 1, para. 4) S.6.9.4 SPS Agreement, sufficient scientific evidence, need for (SPS 2.2) S.6.3.1-2 standard of review (DSU 11) applicability to Anti-Dumping Agreement subject to AD 17.6 S.7.1.1 “objective assessment of the facts” S.7.2.1 de novo review, exclusion S.7.2.1 evidence, alleged disregard or distortion by panel S.7.3.2, S.7.3.3 discretion in selection of relevant evidence S.7.3.4 discretion to select which evidence to refer to explicitly S.7.3.4 “objective assessment of matter before it” S.7.2.1 applicability of and conformity with relevant covered agreements, customary international law, applicability S.7.2.1 applicable law, customary international law S.7.2.1 terms of reference of panels (DSU 7), as definition of jurisdiction/legal claims at issue, legal claim included in terms of reference, limitation of jurisdiction to C.2.1 third party rights T.8.1 panel proceedings (DSU 10 and Appendix 3), panel’s discretion and, enhancement in accordance with due process T.8.1 Working Procedures (appellate review), working schedule (WP 26), extension of deadline for circulation of AB report W.2.10.2.1 Working Procedures (panel) (DSU 12.1 and Appendix 3) panel’s discretion D.2.2.2-3, O.1.1, W.3.3 burden of proof W.3.3 due process and D.2.2.2-3, O.1.1 Agreement on Agriculture (AG), special safeguards (AG 5), c.i.f. import price (AG 5.1(b)) A.1.14.1, A.1.14.2 bilateral agreements, covered agreement, whether B.2.1 competence (AB) issues of law/legal interpretations (DSU 17.6) S.3.1.3 alleged failure of panel to make objective assessment (DSU 11) S.3.2.3 upholding, modification or reversal of legal findings and conclusions (DSU 17.13) S.3.1.3 GATT 1947, continuing relevance under WTO B.2.1 interpretation of covered agreements, means context, historical background to conclusion of treaty I.3.10.6 supplementary means (VC 32) I.3.10.6 interpretation of covered agreements, phrases, “c.i.f. import price” (AG 5.1(b)) A.1.14.1, A.1.14.2 judicial economy, panel’s discretionary power to determine, which arguments must be examined S.7.2.3 Licensing Agreement L.2.3 trade distortion in part of trade not subject to procedures L.2.3 non-discriminatory administration of quantitative restrictions (GATT XIII) T.2.5-7 allocation to Members having a substantial interest (GATT XIII:2(d)) T.2.5 compensation negotiated under GATT XXVIII and T.2.6 distribution of trade as close as possible to expected shares in absence of restrictions as aim (GATT XIII:2, chapeau) T.2.7 notice of appeal, requirements (AB/WP 20(2)), statement of allegations of errors on issues of law/legal interpretations (AB/WP 20(2)(d)), allegation of panel’s failure to make objective assessment (DSU 11), need for specific reference S.3.2.3 Oilseeds Agreement (EC-Brazil), covered agreement, whether B.2.1 publication and administration of trade regulations (GATT X), laws, regulations, judicial decisions and administrative rulings, of general application (GATT X:1) P.5.1 Schedules of Concessions (GATT II) diminishment of obligations, exclusion T.1.3.2 as integral part of GATT 1994 (WTO II:2), Schedule LXXX B.2.1, T.1.3.3 Schedule LXXX bilateral agreements B.2.1 as integral part of GATT 1994 (WTO II:2) B.2.1, T.1.3.3 standard of review (DSU 11) “objective assessment of matter before it” S.7.2.2-3 all arguments, need to consider S.7.2.3 Working Procedures (appellate review), written responses (WP 28) W.2.12.4 amicus curiae briefs A.2.1.12 NGO/private individual briefs A.2.1.12 discretionary power of panel to accept/reject A.2.1.12 WTO Member briefs A.2.2 discretionary power of AB to accept/reject A.2.2.1-7 interference with “fair, prompt and effective resolution of trade disputes” and A.2.2.6 rights as third party (DSU 10.2 and 17.4), relevance A.2.2.4 burden of proof B.3.1.11-12 allocation comparative difficulties, relevance B.3.1.12 general rule/exception, relationship, relevance, SPS 3.1 and 3.3 B.3.1.11-12 onus probandi actori incumbit as general principle of evidence B.3.1.11 compliance, WTO obligations, good faith/pacta sunt servanda principle P.3.1.9 due process (dispute settlement proceedings), amicus curiae briefs and A.2.2.6 good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VC 26)), compliance with WTO obligations P.3.1.9 information or technical advice, panel’s right to seek (DSU 13), panel’s rights, not to seek S.4.12 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)] P.3.4.5 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines object and purpose W.2.1.2 same or closely related phrases in different agreements B.3.1.11 non-retroactivity of treaties (VC 28) P.3.4.5 pre-existing rights, TBT Agreement T.5.3.1-2 procedure, fair, prompt and effective resolution of disputes and W.2.1.2 prompt and satisfactory resolution of disputes, Members’ right to (DSU 3), procedure, role W.2.1.2 SPS Agreement, harmonization of measures (SPS 3) general rule/exception relationship (SPS 3.1 and 3.2), whether B.3.1.11 measures based on international standards (SPS 3.1), burden of proof B.3.1.11 standard of review (DSU 11) “objective assessment of the facts” evidence, alleged disregard or distortion by panel evidence introduced at interim review, right to ignore (DSU 15) S.7.3.13 independence in evaluating S.7.3.12B TBT Agreement applicability to pre-existing measures T.5.3.1-2 “international standards … as a basis for technical regulation” (TBT 2.4) applicability to existing regulations T.4.5 “as the basis” T.4.3.1 “except when … ineffective or inappropriate” T.4.4.1 legitimacy of objective (TBT 2.2/2.4), relevance T.4.4.2 “relevant parts of them” T.4.3.2 legitimate objectives (TBT 2.2/2.4) T.4.4.2 standards (Annex 1.2), consensus, relevance (Annex 1.2 and Explanatory note) T.4.2.1 “technical regulation” (Annex 1.1) T.4.1.6-9 identifiability requirement T.4.1.7 naming and labelling distinguished T.4.1.9 third party rights W.2.9.7 AB proceedings (WP 24) W.2.9.7 passive participation in oral hearings W.2.9.7 Working Procedures (appellate review) object and purpose, fair, prompt and effective resolution of disputes W.2.1.2 withdrawal of appeal (AB/WP 30) W.2.13.1.3-63 conditioned on right to refile notice of appeal in accordance with WP 20 W.2.13.1.3-6 good faith and W.2.13.1.4-6 unconditional nature of right W.2.13.1.3-5 Working Procedures (panel) (DSU 12.1 and Appendix 3), review of evidence S.3.3.9 WTO Agreement, obligation to ensure conformity of domestic laws, regulations and administrative procedures (WTO XVI:4) W.4.3 burden of proof B.3.1.15 allocation, importance of issue, relevance to B.3.1.15 defences and exceptions Enabling Clause B.3.3.8-14 inconsistency with GATT I:1, sufficiency as basis of complaint B.3.3.13-14, E.1.1.4 measures which result in a higher level of protection that international standards (SPS 3.3) B.3.3.8-14 party’s two-stage obligation to raise and prove B.3.3.12 permissive provision as defence/exception B.3.3.8 onus probandi actori incumbit as general principle of evidence, defences/exceptions and B.3.3.8-14 competence of panels and AB (DSU 3.2), right to develop own legal reasoning including arguments not adduced by parties (jura novit curia) P.3.2.1 defences and exceptions Enabling Clause as exception to GATT I:1 B.3.3.9 interpretation in accordance with customary rules of interpretation of public international law B.3.3.11 provision governing trade measures as opposed to non-trade measures, relevance to classification as B.3.3.10 Enabling Clause conformity with GSP (generalized, non-reciprocal and non-discriminatory treatment), need for (Enabling Clause, para 2(a)) E.1.1 “discriminate” / “non-discriminatory” E.1.2.2-6 absence of clear qualifying criteria or standards E.1.2.7 identity of tariff preferences, need for E.1.2.3-7 least developed countries (para. 2(d)) and E.1.3.1 “generalized” E.1.2.4 “in accordance” E.1.1.2 as exception to GATT 1:1 B.3.3.9, E.1.1.1 inconsistency with GATT I:1 as preliminary step E.1.1.2 as integral part of WTO Agreement W.4.1.1 least developed countries (para. 2(d)) differential treatment under E.1.3.1 para. 2(a), independence of E.1.3.1 object and purpose elimination of fragmented system of preferences E.1.2.4 facilitation and promotion of trade without raising of barriers/undue difficulties (para. 3(a)) E.1.4.1 improvement of developing countries’ share of growth in international trade (WTO, preamble) E.1.2.5, E.1.5.1 least developed countries E.1.5.1, W.4.1.1 preparatory work E.1.1.3, E.1.2.4 1971 Waiver Decision E.1.1.1, E.1.1.3 treatment designed and … modified to respond to needs of developing countries (para. 3(c)) E.1.5 development, financial and trade needs, limitation to E.1.5.2 differential treatment, scope for E.1.5.1-2 objective standard, need for E.1.5.2 “positive” response E.1.5.2 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)] defences and exceptions B.3.3.11 DSU 3.2 B.3.1.15 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines multiple authentic languages (VC 33) I.3.11.4 “stronger” language in two of three authentic languages, preference for I.3.11.4 object and purpose E.1.2.4-6 preamble as evidence of W.4.1.1 ordinary meaning E.1.1.2-3 interpretation of covered agreements, means dictionaries E.1.2.1 preamble (WTO) E.1.5.1 preparatory work, Enabling Clause E.1.2.4 interpretation of covered agreements, specific terms and phrases, “in accordance with”, Enabling Clause, para. 2(a) E.1.1.2 MFN treatment (GATT I) M.2.1.5 object and purpose M.2.1.5 request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2) implied claims, exclusion T.6.2.19 legal basis of claim R.2.2.17-19 summary, sufficiency reference to Enabling Clause including specific provisions R.2.2.18-19, T.6.2.19 reference to GATT I:1 as including reference to Enabling Clause R.2.2.17 third party rights W.2.9.8 AB proceedings (WP 24) W.2.9.8 passive participation in oral hearings W.2.9.8 WTO Agreement integral parts (WTO II), applicability of preamble to all covered agreements W.4.1.1 object and purpose (preamble) W.4.1.1
Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), determination of dumping (AD 2) calculation of administrative, selling and general costs and profits (AD 2.2.2), low volume sales, relevance (AD 2.2.2 chapeau) A.3.10 calculation of dumping margins (AD 2.4), method, right to choose, GATT VI:2 and A.3.14.5, A.3.65.8 period of investigation (POI) discretionary selection of data from period within POI A.3.2.1 duration, absence of provision A.3.2.1 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), determination of injury (AD 3) country by country analysis/cumulative assessment of volume and prices (AD 3.3) A.3.20.0, A.3.20.2-4 country by country analysis, whether necessary A.3.20.1-2, A.3.21.2 rationale A.3.21.4 volume and prices as “effects” (AD 3.3) A.3.21.3 evaluation of injury factors (AD 3.4) A.3.22.7-9 examination of other known factors (AD 3.5) A.3.25 dumping and injury analysis/causality analysis, distinguishability A.3.25.3-4 “known” to investigating authority A.3.25.1 “other than dumped imports” A.3.25.1 simultaneous injury to domestic industry, need for A.3.25.1 growth A.3.22.8 evaluation of other AD 3.4 factors and A.3.23.3-43 manner of evaluating causal relationship (AD 3.5) A.3.23 absence of provision for/freedom of choice A.3.22.7, A.3.22.9, A.3.24.8, E.3.7 collective effective, whether examination required A.3.26.1-3 injurious effects of dumped goods and of other factors, need to distinguish (AD 3.5) A.3.24.7, A.3.26.1 non-attribution to dumped imports of injury caused by other factors (AD 3.5) A.3.24.7-8, A.3.26.3 separate record of evaluation of each factor, whether required A.3.23.2 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), evidentiary rules (AD 6) disclosure to interested parties of information relevant for presentation of case (AD 6.4) A.3.31 “relevant” A.3.32.1-3 “used by the authorities” A.3.32.1-3 full opportunity for defence of interests, right to (AD 6.2) A.3.31 disclosure obligation (AD 6.4) and A.3.31.1 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), GATT 1994 VI and, determination of dumping and calculation of dumping margin A.3.65.8 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), standard/powers of review (AD 17.6) assessment of the facts (AD 17.6(i)) A.3.59.10 error, need to substantiate A.3.59.10 applicable law, determination of dumping and calculation of dumping margins A.3.65.8 compliance, WTO obligations, good faith/pacta sunt servanda principle P.3.1.11 good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VC 26)), compliance with WTO obligations P.3.1.11 interpretation of covered agreements, means, context, GATT VI/AD, interrelationship A.3.65.8 specific action against dumping (AD 18.1) or subsidy (SCM 32.1), requirements, accordance with provisions of GATT VI as interpreted by Anti-Dumping Agreement A.3.65.8
|
|
  |
contact us : World Trade Organization, rue de Lausanne 154, CH-1211 Geneva 21, Switzerland
