 |
|
|
 |
|
|
| home > trade topics > dispute settlement > appellate body > repertory > index uz |
|
|
SUBJECT INDEX BY CASE: APPELLATE BODY REPORTS U-Z |
|
> US — 1916 Act |
Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), consultation and dispute settlement (AD 17) GATT XXII and XXIII compared A.3.54.1, A.3.55.2, L.1.2 legal basis for consultation/claim (AD 17.3/AD 17.4) legislation as such A.3.54.1, A.3.55.2, A.3.56.6-7, J.2.1.10-11, L.1.2 “measure” (AD 17.4), definitive anti-dumping duties A.3.56.4-7 “matter”, referral to DSB (AD 17.4), identification of measure at issue, need for (DSU 6.2) A.3.56.4-5 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), determination of dumping (AD 2), injurious effect on domestic industry, relevance (AD 2/GATT VI:1) A.3.1.1 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), GATT 1994 VI and AD Agreement as agreement on implementation of GATT VI A.3.64.2 AD Agreement and GATT 1994 as integral part of WTO Agreement A.3.64.1 applicability of GATT VI as implying applicability of AD Agreement A.3.64.2 dumping, constituent elements (AD 2/GATT VI:1) injurious effect on domestic industry A.3.65.1 intention of dumping A.3.1.1, A.3.61.1, A.3.65.1 “may levy” (GATT VI:2) as limitation to Member’s choice whether or not to impose anti-dumping duty (AD 9) A.3.65.2 scope of GATT VI as clarified by AD 18.1 (specific action against dumping) A.3.65.3-5 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), obligation to ensure conformity with AD of domestic laws, regulations and administrative procedures (AD 18.4) A.3.62.1 dispute settlement procedures, applicability to A.3.62.1 “laws, regulations and administrative procedures”, determination of legal status as by reference to WTO law L.1.1-3 competence (panels) objections, requirements, timeliness J.2.1.8 obligation to examine, at any stage during proceedings J.2.1.8 conditional appeal C.5.1 decisions, procedures and customary practices under GATT 1947 (WTO XVI:1) J.2.1.9, L.1.1, M.1.1-2 DSU, applicability consultation and dispute settlement in anti-dumping (AD 17) L.1.2 obligation to ensure conformity (DSU 18.4) A.3.62.1 due process (dispute settlement proceedings) panel’s discretion on matters of procedure (DSU 12.1 and Appendix 3) D.2.2.11 participation in panel proceedings, third parties D.2.2.11 GATT 1947, continuing relevance under WTO, decisions, procedures and customary practices (WTO XVI:1) J.2.1.9, L.1.1, M.1.1-2 GATT acquis J.2.1.9, L.1.1, M.1.1-2 interpretation of covered agreements, means context, GATT VI/AD, interrelationship A.3.64.0, A.3.65.1-7 GATT acquis J.2.1.9, L.1.1, M.1.1-2 legislation as such, right to challenge A.3.54.1, A.3.55.2, A.3.56.6-7, J.2.1.9-10 mandatory/discretionary legislation, whether distinguishable, executive discretion and M.1.4 precedent, decisions, procedures and customary practices under GATT 1947 (WTO XVI:1) J.2.1.9, L.1.1, M.1.1-2 request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2), identification of specific measure at issue A.3.56.4-5 specific action against dumping (AD 18.1) or subsidy (SCM 32.1) action under other relevant provisions of GATT 1994 distinguished (AD 18.1, Footnote 24) A.3.61.2, A.3.61.4 requirements accordance with provisions of GATT VI as interpreted by Anti-Dumping Agreement A.3.61.3, A.3.65.5-7 civil and criminal proceedings and penalties, whether A.3.65.7 intention of dumping, relevance A.3.61.1 measure against dumping/subsidy, design and structure of measure as evidence of protective application A.3.65.6 measure specific to dumping/subsidy A.3.61.1-3, A.3.65.6 presence of constituent elements of dumping/subsidy A.3.61.1 third party rights T.8.2 panel proceedings (DSU 10 and Appendix 3), panel’s discretion and, enhancement in accordance with due process T.8.2 Working Procedures (appellate review), oral hearing (WP 27), joint hearing W.2.11.2 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), sunset review (AD 11.3) “likelihood” test, continuance or recurrence of injury S.2.32 SCM Agreement, sunset review (AD 21.3), identity of provisions I.3.3.1-2 burden of proof B.3.1.13 legislation as such, challenge to B.3.1.13 presumption of consistency of measure with WTO obligations M.5.8 clarity/ambiguity of measure M.5.8 prima facie case, text of legislation, sufficiency B.3.1.13 competence (panels) objections, requirements, timeliness D.2.2.18, J.2.1.14, T.6.1.8 obligation to examine at any stage during proceedings D.2.2.18, J.2.1.14, T.6.1.8 ex proprio motu J.2.1.14 competence of panels and AB (DSU 3.2), correct interpretation and application of covered agreements and I.3.10.9 countervailing duties (SCM, Part V) balance between rights and obligations relating to, need for S.2.1.1 duration (SCM 21.1) S.2.30.1 level amount of existing subsidy, limitation to S.2.30 “to the extent necessary” (SCM 21.1) S.2.30 preconditions (SCM 19.1) benefit S.2.30.1 standard of proof (SCM 22.1) S.2.34.1 public notice and explanation of determinations (SCM 22) S.2.34.1 as remedy to offset benefits of subsidies S.2.1.1 review of need for continued imposition (SCM 21.2) S.2.30.1, S.2.31.4-5 burden/standard of proof S.2.31.4 obligatory nature S.2.31.5 sunset review (SCM 21.3) Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), sunset review (AD 11.3), identity of provisions I.3.3.1-2 burden/standard of proof in case of “duly substantiated request” by domestic industry S.2.32.6 original investigation requirements (SCM 11 and 12) distinguished S.2.33.0, S.2.34.1 review on initiative of investigating authorities S.2.32.6-7 de minimis standard absence of reference to, relevance I.3.3.1-2, S.2.21.2, S.2.32.2, S.2.32.5 termination of investigation provisions (SCM 11.9) distinguished S.2.21.1-3 time-bound limitation on countervailing duties (SCM 11.9) and I.3.10.10, S.2.31.5, S.2.32 original investigation requirements distinguished S.2.32.3-4, S.2.32.7, S.2.33 “likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of subsidization and injury” test (SCM 21.3) S.2.32 termination automaticity (SCM 21.3) I.3.10.10, S.2.31.5, S.2.32 “immediately” following determination that duty no longer warranted (SCM 21.2) S.2.31.4 decisions of domestic courts B.3.1.13, M.5.8 developing countries (SCM 27) S.2.35.2.1 de minimis subsidization threshold (SCM 27.10 and 27.11) S.2.35.2 due process (dispute settlement proceedings), terms of reference, role R.2.1.7, T.6.1.10 evidence, acceptability as decisions of domestic courts B.3.1.13, M.5.8 opinions of legal experts B.3.1.13, M.5.8 practice in application of laws B.3.1.13, M.5.8 teachings of publicists B.3.1.13, M.5.8 text of legislation B.3.1.13, M.5.8 export subsidy, definition, applicability of SCM 1 provisions S.2.2.4 information or technical advice, panel’s right to seek (DSU 13), panel’s rights, not to seek S.4.13, S.7.3.15 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.3.1.5 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines absence of provision, relevance I.3.3.1-3, S.2.21.2 object and purpose S.2.1.1 preamble as evidence of S.2.1.1 same or closely related phrases in different agreements I.3.3.1-2, S.2.32.2 cross-referencing, role I.3.3.2, S.2.21.2, S.2.32.2 text/plain language I.3.1.5 interpretation of covered agreements, means context I.3.3 preamble of agreement under consideration, as evidence of object and purpose S.2.1.1 preparatory work, evidence to support claim, need for I.3.10.10 supplementary means (VC 32) I.3.10.9-10 need to identify as such I.3.10.9 investigation of dumping (AD 5)/subsidy (SCM 11) termination (SCM 11.9) limitation of provisions to investigation phase S.2.21.1 standard, applicability S.2.21.1-3 sunset review (SCM 21.3) distinguished S.2.21.1-3 legislation as such, right to challenge, burden of proof and B.3.1.13, M.5.8 public notice and explanation of determinations on countervailing duties (SCM 22) S.2.34.1 request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2) compliance, due process (dispute settlement proceedings), importance of, scrutiny by panel T.6.1.10 compliance, importance of, scrutiny by panel R.2.1.7, T.6.1.10 identification of specific measure at issue R.2.1.7, R.2.3.11, T.6.1.9 “certain aspects of sunset review procedure”, sufficiency R.2.3.11, T.6.3.4 legal basis of claim distinguished T.6.1.9 legal basis of claim R.2.2.15 rectification at subsequent stages, arguments in written or other submission or statement R.2.2.15, T.6.2.4 summary, sufficiency R.2.1.7 listing of paragraphs of agreement allegedly breached R.2.2.16, T.6.2.5 reference to GATT II R.2.2.15 SCM Agreement determination of injury (SCM 15) S.2.25 “injury” (SCM 15, Footnote 45) S.2.25.1 object and purpose, balanced framework of rights and obligations relating to countervailing duties S.2.1.1 standard of review (DSU 11), “objective assessment of the facts”, evidence, alleged disregard or distortion by panel, discretion in selection of relevant evidence S.7.3.14 subsidies, prohibited (SCM, Part II), amount of subsidy, relevance S.2.2.4, S.2.25.1 subsidy, definition (SCM 1) applicability “for purposes of this agreement” S.2.2.4 conferral of benefit (SCM 1.1(b)) S.2.30.1 terms of reference of panels (DSU 7) as definition of jurisdiction/legal claims at issue R.2.1.7, T.6.1.10 due process and R.2.1.7, T.6.1.10 obligations, to scrutinize request for establishment of panel for compliance with DSU 6.2 R.2.1.7, T.6.1.10 burden of proof prima facie case B.3.2.7 evidence and arguments in support of claim, need for B.3.2.7 competence of panels and AB (DSU 3.2) right to develop own legal reasoning including arguments not adduced by parties (jura novit curia) C.2.2 to clarify existing provisions C.3.1.1 consultations (DSU 4) establishment of panel, as prerequisite C.7.4 measure at issue (DSU 4.4), measure subsequent to request for consultations C.7.4 DSU, applicability, obligation to resort to (DSU 23) R.2.2.12 mootness of panel findings M.3.2 ultra vires statements M.3.2 request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2) identification of specific measure at issue measure subsequent to date of request for consultations T.6.3.3 specific measure the subject of consultations, need for identity with, whether T.6.3.3 legal basis of claim R.2.2.12 arguments distinguished T.6.2.13 summary, sufficiency, reference to DSU 23 as including reference to DSU 23.1 and 23.2 R.2.2.12, T.6.2.12-15 suspension of concessions (DSU 22), authorization, need for, (DSU 3.7, 22.6 and 23.2(c)) S.9.1 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 M.3.2 unilateral action by Member, prohibition (DSU 23) R.2.2.12 administrative instruments, right to challenge A.3.55.3, A.3.62.2, M.1.9 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), consultation and dispute settlement (AD 17) legal basis for consultation/claim (AD 17.3/AD 17.4) good faith view of Member (“considers”) that benefits are being impaired or nullified (AD 17.3) A.3.55.4, L.1.7, P.3.1.12 legislation as such A.3.55.3, A.3.56.8 administrative instrument A.3.55.3, A.3.62.2 “measure” (AD 17.4) A.3.55.4, A.3.56.8 acceptance of price undertakings L.1.6 definitive anti-dumping duties A.3.56.8 provisional measures L.1.6 special or additional rule and procedure (DSU 1.2 and Appendix 2), whether S.5.4 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), determination of dumping (AD 2) calculation of dumping margins (AD 2.4), “zeroing”, negative differences and A.3.14.4 “for the purposes of this agreement” A.3.8.1 methodology, Members’ freedom to choose consistently with AD A.3.51.1 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), evidentiary rules (AD 6), applicability, sunset reviews (AD 11.4) A.3.53 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), imposition and collection of anti-dumping duties (AD 9) calculation of “all other” anti-dumping duty rate (AD 9.4), sunset review (AD 11.3), applicability to A.3.40.1 “in respect of any product” (AD 9.2) A.3.40.1 sunset review (AD 11.3), applicability to A.3.40.1 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), obligation to ensure conformity with AD of domestic laws, regulations and administrative procedures (AD 18.4) A.3.62.2-4, L.1.7 dispute settlement procedures, applicability to L.1.8 “laws, regulations and administrative procedures” A.3.62.2-3, L.1.8, M.1.9 characterization by domestic authorities, relevance A.3.62.3, L.1.8 determination of legal status as by reference to WTO law A.3.62.3, L.1.4-11 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), standard/powers of review (AD 17.6), determination of normative character of challenged “measure” A.3.62.4 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), sunset review (AD 11.3) applicability of AD 2.1 (“dumping”) A.3.8.0, A.3.49.0, A.3.49.1 applicability of AD 2.4 (calculation of dumping margin) A.3.13.1, A.3.49.1-2 applicability of AD 9.4 (calculation of “all other” anti-dumping rate) A.3.40.1 continuation of duty during review A.3.47A.2 as exception to mandatory rule A.3.45.1, A.3.47A.2 initiation before expiry of five years from imposition of duty A.3.45.1 investigatory/adjudicatory functions A.3.47.1, A.3.52.3 parties’ obligations A.3.52.3 proactive role of investigating authorities A.3.47.1, A.3.52.3 “likelihood” test AD 6 provisions, applicability A.3.53.1-2 continuance or recurrence of dumping A.3.8.1, A.3.45.1, A.3.46.1-2 company-specific basis determination of likelihood A.3.40.1, A.3.50.1, A.3.53.2 continuance or recurrence of injury A.3.45.1 “positive evidence” / “objective examination” requirement (AD 3.1) A.3.52.1-3 probability, need for A.3.40.1 relevant factors dumping margins A.3.13.1, A.3.48.1-2, A.3.51.1-2 factors other than dumping margins/import volumes A.3.51.3 import volumes A.3.51.1-2 right to make A.3.51.1-2 methodology, absence of provision A.3.48.1, A.3.50.1 parties’ rights full opportunity for defence of interests A.3.47A.1 “interested party” (AD 11.2) A.3.50.1 notice of process A.3.47A.1 reasons for determination A.3.47A.1 SCM Agreement, sunset review (AD 21.3), identity of provisions A.3.63.3 time-limits (AD 11.4) A.3.47A.2 diligence, need for A.3.47A.2 applicable law, laws, regulations and administrative procedures (AD 18.4), determination of status as A.3.62.3, L.1.8 burden of proof, presumption of consistency of measure with WTO obligations, clarity/ambiguity of measure L.1.11 competence (panels) claims against legislation as such A.3.55.3, A.3.56.8, L.1.4-11, M.1.7-9 mandatory/discretionary nature of challenged measure, obligation to examine M.1.7 consultations (DSU 4) fruitfulness of resort to dispute settlement procedures (DSU 3.7) L.1.10, M.1.7, P.3.1.13 good faith requirement (DSU 3.10) L.1.10, M.1.7 countervailing duties (SCM, Part V), sunset review (SCM 21.3), Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), sunset review (AD 11.3), identity of provisions A.3.63.3 evidence, acceptability as, practice in application of laws A.3.52 GATT acquis A.3.55.3, A.3.62.2 good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VC 26)) dispute settlement procedures, engagement in (DSU 3.10) L.1.10, M.1.7, R.5.5 view of Member that benefits are being impaired or nullified (AD 17.3) A.3.55.4, L.1.7, P.3.1.12-13, R.5.5 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines narrow/broad interpretation M.1.9 same or closely related phrases in different agreements A.3.55.3, A.3.62.2, A.3.63.3 cross-referencing, role A.3.49.1 interpretation of covered agreements, means, GATT acquis A.3.55.3, A.3.62.2 interpretation of covered agreements, phrases, “for the purpose of this agreement” (AD 2.1) A.3.8.1, A.3.49.0, A.3.49.1 judicial economy M.1.8 legislation as such, right to challenge A.3.55.3, A.3.56.8, L.1.4-11 burden of proof and M.5.9 mandatory/discretionary legislation, whether distinguishable L.1.9-10, M.1.7-9 discretionary elements under separate law, effect M.1.8 panel’s obligation to examine status M.1.7 normative instrument L.1.5 “measure” AD 17.4 A.3.55.4, A.3.56.8, L.1.6 DSU 3.3 L.1.7 act or omission attributable to Member L.1.4 executive agency determinations L.1.4 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 W.2.7.5.3 request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2) fruitfulness of action L.1.10, M.1.7, P.3.1.13 determination by Member R.5.6 identification of specific measure at issue L.1.6 legal basis of claim, “measure” impairing benefits (DSU 3.3) L.1.4 safeguard measures, characteristics, exceptional nature of remedy S.1.1.1 safeguard measures, standard/powers of review, existence of right coupled with exercise of right in conformity with SG S.1.1.1 special or additional rules and procedures for dispute settlement (DSU, Appendix 2) AD 17, whether S.5.4 conflict with DSU provisions, precedence in case of (WTO, Annex 1A) S.5.4 standard of review (DSU 11), “objective assessment of the facts”, evidence, alleged disregard or distortion by panel, obligation to examine and evaluate evidence A.3.52.00 standing/right to bring claim (DSU 3.7) fruitfulness of resort to dispute settlement procedures L.1.10, M.1.7, P.3.1.13, R.5.6 good faith engagement in dispute settlement procedures (DSU 3.10) and R.5.5-6 State responsibility, acts or omissions of executive agency or executive branch L.1.4 WTO Agreement, conflict between constituent covered agreements, precedence (WTO, Annex 1A) S.5.4 de novo review of facts, exclusion S.7.4.5 directly competitive or substitutable products (GATT III:2) D.1.10 criteria, interchangeability T.7.4.1 competition between unlike products D.1.10, T.7.4.1 as dynamic relationship (including possibility of latent demand), potential to compete as determining factor D.1.10 good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VC 26)), safeguard measure, obligation to withdraw if evidence emerges to show critical factual error P.3.1.6, T.7.1.2 information or technical advice, panel’s right to seek (DSU 13), expert evidence (DSU 13.2), opinion based on data available at time of determination E.3.6 judicial economy, mootness of panel findings M.3.3 “like product” (GATT III:4), competitive relationship, need for T.7.5.1 mootness of panel findings M.3.3 judicial economy and M.3.3 proportionality countermeasures/suspension of concessions (DSU 22.4) and P.3.6.1, S.9.2 safeguard measures (ATC 6.4) and P.3.6.1 State responsibility for breach of international obligation and P.3.6.1, S.9.2 safeguard measures, standard/powers of review assessment of the facts de novo review, exclusion S.7.4.5 in-depth review of “reasoned and adequate” explanation, need for S.7.4.5 substitution of panel’s own assessment, exclusion S.7.4.5 DSU 11, applicability S.7.6.1 standard of review (DSU 11) applicability to Anti-Dumping Agreement subject to AD 17.6 S.7.1.8 “objective assessment of the facts”, de novo review, exclusion S.7.4.5 “objective assessment of matter before it”, in-depth review of explanation, need for S.7.4.5 relevant factors, position of Member at time of determination E.3.6 serious damage or actual threat thereof (ATC 6(2))/SG 4, Member’s determination of, evidence available to Member, limitation to E.3.6, S.7.6.0, T.7.2.2 temporal scope, evidence available to Member, limitation to E.3.6, S.7.6 State responsibility, countermeasures for breach of international obligations, proportionality and P.3.6.1, S.9.2 suspension of concessions (DSU 22), level (DSU 22.4), proportionality, need for S.9.2 Textiles and Clothing Agreement (ATC), transitional safeguards (ATC 6) application of measure on Member-to-Member basis (ATC 6.4) attribution of damage from “sharp and substantial increase in imports” T.7.6 comparative analysis T.7.6.1, T.7.6.3-4 from “a Member” T.7.6.2 from “Members individually” T.7.6.1 “domestic industry producing like and/or directly competitive products” T.7.3 “directly”, competition between unlike products T.7.4.1 “directly competitive”, interchangeability test T.7.4.1 good faith obligation to withdraw if evidence emerges to show critical factual error, whether P.3.1.6, T.7.1.2 “directly” T.7.4.1 serious damage or actual threat thereof (ATC 6(2)), Member’s determination of due diligence requirement, available evidence, limitation to E.3.6, S.7.6.1, T.7.2.2 procedure, absence of provision T.7.2.1 standard of review, DSU 11, applicability S.7.6.1 transitional nature of ATC (ATC, preamble) T.7.1.2 competence (AB), issues of law/legal interpretations (DSU 17.6), alleged failure of panel to make objective assessment (DSU 11) S.3.2.2 competence (panels), claims against legislation as such M.1.6 countervailing duties (SCM, Part V) compliance with GATT VI:3 and SCM Agreement (SCM 10) S.2.29.1 duration (SCM 21.1) S.2.29.1 level amount of existing subsidy, limitation to S.2.29.1 “to the extent necessary” (SCM 21.1) S.2.29.1 preconditions (SCM 19.1), benefit S.2.26.1, S.2.29.1 privatization, relevance S.2.31.6-7 review of need for continued imposition (SCM 21.2) S.2.29.1, S.2.31.6-7 interpretation of covered agreements, means, context, treaty/treaties as a whole S.2.9.7 legislation as such, right to challenge, mandatory/discretionary legislation, whether distinguishable M.1.6 notice of appeal, requirements (AB/WP 20(2)) amendment W.2.7.4 right to defend interests and W.2.7.1.1, W.2.7.4.1-2 statement of allegations of errors on issues of law/legal interpretations (AB/WP 20(2)(d)) W.2.6.9-10, W.2.7.1.1, W.2.7.3.2 allegation of panel’s failure to make objective assessment (DSU 11), need for specific reference S.3.2.2, W.2.7.5, W.2.7.5.1 privatization conferral of benefit (SCM 1.1(b)) and S.2.9.5, S.2.9.9, S.2.31.6-7 continuing need for countervailing duties and S.2.31.6-7 SCM Agreement, calculation of subsidy in terms of benefit to recipient (SCM 14), “benefit” (SCM 1.1(b)) and S.2.9.6 subsidy, definition (SCM 1) conferral of benefit (SCM 1.1(b)) S.2.9.5-9, S.2.26.1, S.2.29.1 “benefit”, cost to government, relevance S.2.9.5 privatization, relevance S.2.9.5, S.2.9.9, S.2.31.6-7 recipient “an industry” (SCM 6.1(b)) S.2.9.7 “enterprise or industry or group of enterprises or industries” (SCM 2) S.2.9.7 “exporter or foreign producer” (SCM 11.2(ii)) S.2.9.7 “firm or industry” (SCM, Annex I) S.2.9.7 firms/owners, relevance of distinction S.2.9.6-8 group of persons S.2.9.7 “manufacture, production or export of any merchandise” (SCM 10, Footnote 36) S.2.9.7, S.2.9.8 natural or legal person as S.2.9.7 need for S.2.9.6 “recipient firm” (SCM, Annex IV) S.2.9.7 “sources found to be subsidized” (SCM 19.3) S.2.9.7 financial contribution (SCM 1.1(a)(1)), direct transfer of funds (SCM 1.1(a)(1)), “bestowed directly or indirectly” (SCM 10, Footnote 36/GATT VI:3) S.2.9.7 tax exemption, as circumvention of export subsidy commitments S.2.9.7 Working Procedures (appellate review), fairness and orderly procedure, adoption of appropriate procedure (WP 16.1), failure of notice of appeal to conform with requirements and W.2.6.9-10 actionable/non-actionable subsidy (SCM) S.2.2.2 burden of proof, defences and exceptions, SCM 3.1(a) (Annex I (Illustrative List of Export Subsidies)), Footnote 59, fifth sentence, order of analysis O.2.3 competence (AB) completion of legal analysis (DSU 17.6), factual basis, limitation to panel’s findings or undisputed facts in panel record S.3.1.5 issues of law/legal interpretations (DSU 17.6) “covered in the panel report” S.3.1.5 “developed by the panel” S.3.1.5 issues not raised by parties S.3.1.5 competence (panels), objections, requirements, timeliness O.1.2 consultations (DSU 4) establishment of panel, as prerequisite O.1.2 SCM 4.2, relationship with S.2.18.1-2 costs of marketing exports (AG 9.1(d)) general business costs distinguished A.1.29.1 income tax, whether A.1.29.1 countervailing duties (SCM, Part V), compliance with GATT VI:3 and SCM Agreement (SCM 10) S.2.41.3 export subsidy commitments, prevention of circumvention (AG 10.1) “applied in a manner which …”, legal entitlement/discretionary element, relevance A.1.32.1A, A.1.32A.5 “circumvention” A.1.32 scheduled and unscheduled products, distinction, whether A.1.32.3 tax exemption A.1.32.2, A.1.32.4 “commitments” A.1.30 export subsidy, AG 3.3 prohibition and A.1.6 export subsidy, definition applicability of SCM 1 provisions S.2.2.1-2 “contingent upon export performance” (AG 1(e)/SCM 3.1(a)) A.1.4.1 GATT VI:4/SCM 1.1(a)(1) and 3.1(a), interrelationship S.2.41.3 Illustrative List of Export Subsidies (SCM Annex I) remission or deferral of direct taxes (item (e)) S.2.37 deferral not amounting to export subsidy (Footnote 59) S.2.37.1 export subsidy, prohibition (AG 3.3) in excess of budgetary outlay and quantity commitment level A.1.6.1 export subsidy commitments (AG 10.1) and A.1.6 provision of export subsidies under AG 9.1, dependence on A.1.5.1 scheduled products A.1.6.1 conversion to prohibition A.1.5.2 unscheduled products A.1.6.2 GATT 1947, continuing relevance under WTO G.2.1.4 GATT 1994, WTO Agreement, incorporation into (WTO Annex 1A) G.2.1.4 decisions of Contracting Parties to GATT 1947 (WTO Annex 1A, 1(b)(4)), “legal instruments” (WTO Annex 1A, 1(b)) G.2.1.4 good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VC 26)) dispute settlement procedures, engagement in (DSU 3.10) P.3.1.2 as general principle of international law P.3.1.2 law P.3.1.2 objections to panel procedures O.1.3, P.3.1.2 income tax, marketing cost, whether A.1.29.1 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines object and purpose W.2.1.1 same or closely related phrases in different agreements A.1.4.1 interpretation of covered agreements, means context GATT VI/SCM Agreement, interrelationship S.2.41.3 treaty/treaties as a whole S.2.41.3 interpretation of covered agreements, phrases, “for the purpose of this agreement” (SCM 1.1) S.2.2.2 national treatment, tax discrimination (GATT III:2), Members’ right to determine basis of taxation subject to compliance with WTO obligations T.3.3-4 procedure, fair, prompt and effective resolution of disputes and D.2.2.8, O.1.3, W.2.1.1 prompt and satisfactory resolution of disputes, Members’ right to (DSU 3), procedure, role D.2.2.8, O.1.3, W.2.1.1 request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2) failure to object, effect C.7.3, O.1.2 identification of specific measure at issue, measure subsequent to date of request for consultations C.7.3, O.1.2 SCM Agreement consultations (SCM 4.1-4.4) DSU 4.4, relationship with S.2.18.1-2 “statement of available evidence” (SCM 4.2) S.2.18 subsidy, definition (SCM 1) applicability “for purposes of this agreement” S.2.2.1-2 commonality of terminology in Agreement on Agriculture A.1.3.2 conferral of benefit (SCM 1.1(b)) A.1.3.2 financial contribution (SCM 1.1(a)(1)) A.1.3.2 foregoing of revenues otherwise due (SCM 1.1(a)(1)(ii)), “otherwise due” /basis of comparison (“but for” test) S.2.4.1-2 tax exemption as circumvention of export subsidy commitments A.1.32.2, A.1.32.4, S.2.37.1 Illustrative List of Export Subsidies (SCM Annex I) (item (e)) S.2.37.1 Working Procedures (appellate review) object and purpose, fair, prompt and effective resolution of disputes W.2.1.1 withdrawal of appeal (AB/WP 30) W.2.13.1.1 conditioned on right to refile notice of appeal in accordance with WP 20 W.2.13.1.1 Working Procedures (panel) (DSU 12.1 and Appendix 3), objections, requirements, good faith O.1.3, P.3.1.2 burden of proof defences and exceptions, SCM 3.1(a) (Annex I (Illustrative List of Export Subsidies)), Footnote 59, fifth sentence B.3.3.7 double taxation measures, justification S.2.38.3 onus probandi actori incumbit as general principle of evidence, defences/exceptions and B.3.3.7 double taxation measures, justification (Illustrative List, SCM Annex I (item (e)), Footnote 59) S.2.38 applicable law/Member’s right to determine applicable rules S.2.38.5, S.2.38.7, S.2.38.10, S.2.38.13 common elements S.2.38.7 burden of proof S.2.38.3 as exception to prohibited subsidies rule (SCM 3.1(a)) S.2.38.1 “foreign-source income” S.2.38.4-13 due process (dispute settlement proceedings), participation in panel proceedings, third parties D.2.2.16 export subsidy, definition “contingent upon export performance” (AG 1(e)/SCM 3.1(a)) S.2.12.5-6 in case of subsidy available to property produced either within or outside subsidising State S.2.12.4A, S.2.12.5-6 Illustrative List of Export Subsidies (SCM Annex I) remission or deferral of direct taxes (item (e)) burden of proof S.2.38.2 double taxation measures S.2.38 GATS, applicability (GATS I), “measures affecting trade in services” (GATS I:1), “affecting” (GATS I:1), GATT III:4 compared N.1.10.2 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines narrow/broad interpretation N.1.10.2 same or closely related phrases in different agreements A.1.3.3, N.1.10.2 interpretation of covered agreements, means, legislative history (domestic) I.3.4.1 interpretation of covered agreements, phrases “affecting” GATS I N.1.10.2 GATT III:4 N.1.10.2 multiple complainants (DSU 9), participation in panel proceedings initiated by another complainant D.2.2.16 national treatment, general principle (GATT III:1), “so as to afford protection”, “less favourable treatment” and N.1.11.8 national treatment, regulatory discrimination (GATT III:4) “affecting” N.1.10.2 GATS 1:1 compared N.1.10.2 “less favourable treatment” N.1.11.8-9 “so as to afford protection”, “less favourable treatment” and N.1.11.8 panel proceedings as two-stage process W.3.7, W.3.8 SCM Agreement “withdrawal of subsidy without delay” (SCM 4.7) S.2.19.2 “without delay” S.2.19.2 subsidy, definition (SCM 1) commonality of terminology in Agreement on Agriculture A.1.3.3 conferral of benefit (SCM 1.1(b)) A.1.3.3 financial contribution (SCM 1.1(a)(1)) A.1.3.3 foregoing of revenues otherwise due (SCM 1.1(a)(1)(ii)) A.1.3.3 “otherwise due” /basis of comparison (“but for” test) S.2.4.4-6 obligations relating to subsidies distinguished S.2.2.3 tax exemption, as circumvention of export subsidy commitments, Illustrative List of Export Subsidies (SCM Annex I) (item (e)) S.2.38 third party rights T.8.3-5 panel proceedings (DSU 10 and Appendix 3) interests to be taken into account (DSU 10.1) T.8.5 panel’s discretion and circumscription, exclusion D.2.2.16 enhancement in accordance with due process D.2.2.16, T.8.3 participation in (DSU 10.3) D.2.2.16, T.8.5 submissions, right to (DSU 10.3) T.8.4, T.8.5 Working Procedures (appellate review) working schedule (WP 26), modification in exceptional circumstances at request of parties, participants or third participants (WP 16.2) W.2.6.7 written responses (WP 28) W.2.12.8 burden of proof defences and exceptions GATS XIV (general exceptions) B.3.3.16 GATS XIV(a) (necessity test) B.3.3.17-19, G.4.3.1-3 party’s two-stage obligation to raise and prove B.3.3.16 rebuttal as parties’ obligation B.3.3.16, C.2.6, S.7.2.6 onus probandi actori incumbit as general principle of evidence B.3.3.17-19, G.4.3.1 presumption of consistency of measure with WTO obligations, party’s obligation to demonstrate inconsistency in relation to each element of claim B.3.2.13 prima facie case evidence and legal arguments in support of claim, need for B.3.2.14-17 other party’s obligation to rebut, whether G.4.3.1-2 as precondition to ruling on claim B.3.2.13, B.3.2.17 competence of panels and AB (DSU 3.2), right to develop own legal reasoning including arguments not adduced by parties (jura novit curia) C.2.6, S.7.2.6 due process (dispute settlement proceedings) opportunity to respond to evidence/presentations of other parties B.3.3.15, D.2.2.20-1, O.1.13-14, P.3.1.14 defence, time limits, failure of party to object to timing of defence D.2.2.25, O.1.16 defence, time limits for raising O.1.14-16, S.7.2.5 panel’s discretion on matters of procedure (DSU 12.1 and Appendix 3) D.2.2.24 panel’s right to adjust timetable S.7.2.5 evidence (panel procedures) (DSU 12) time-limits for submission, responding parties B.3.3.15, D.2.2.22, O.1.13-16 as two-stage process, rebuttal of arguments and evidence B.3.3.16, C.2.6, S.7.2.6 GATS, applicability (GATS I) G.1.1.0, G.1.3.1.1-2 “measures affecting trade in services” (GATS I:1) DSU 4.2 compared C.7.19, G.1.1.8, R.2.3.15, T.6.3.11 “trade in services” (GATS I:2) G.1.1.9 GATS, Schedules of Specific Commitments (GATS XX), interpretation G.1.2.1.1-3 applicable law G.1.2.1.1, I.3.10.12 context 1993 Scheduling Guidelines, similarity of language G.1.2.2.12, I.3.10.14 any agreement made between the parties (VC 31(2)(a)) or accepted by parties (VC 31(2)(b)), Central Product Classification (CPC) and Services Sectoral Classification List (W/120), whether G.1.2.2, I.3.3.4-5 Central Product Classification (CPC) G.1.2.2.7 other Members’ Schedules G.1.2.2.6, G.1.2.2.8 Services Sectoral Classification List (W/120) G.1.2.2.3, G.1.2.2.5, G.1.2.2.11, I.3.3.4-5 as integral part of GATS (GATS XX:3) G.1.2.1.1, I.3.10.12 preparatory work (VC 32), W/120 and 1993 Scheduling Guidelines as G.1.2.2.10-12, G.1.3.4.6, I.3.10.13, I.3.10.14 “sectors” avoidance of ambiguity, need for G.1.2.2.12, I.3.10.14 common format and terminology, importance G.1.2.2.12, I.3.10.14 DSU 22.3(f) compared G.1.2.2.5 mutual exclusion G.1.2.2.4 “subsector” G.1.2.2.5 structure of agreement G.1.1.9, G.1.2.2.4 subsequent practice (VC 31(3)(b)), 2001 Guidelines, whether G.1.2.2.9, I.3.9.6 General Exceptions (GATS XIV) alternative WTO-consistent measure, availability B.3.3.17-19, G.4.3.1-2 complaining party’s obligation to suggest G.4.4.4 consultations as G.4.4.4 application causing arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination or disguised restriction on trade G.4.5.1-4 consultations as G.4.4.4 “necessary” as alternative measure G.4.4.4 burden of proof B.3.3.17-19, G.4.3.1-3 as objective standard G.4.4.1 obligation to consult other party G.4.4.3-4 as weighing and balancing of series of factors G.4.3.1, G.4.3.3, G.4.4.2 nexus between measure and interest protected, need for G.4.1.2, O.2.11 order of analysis (chapeau compliance/exceptions) O.2.11 public morals or public order (GATS XIV(a)) B.3.3.17-19, G.4.2.1-2 public order (GATS footnote 5) G.4.2.2 General Exceptions (GATT XX) alternative WTO-consistent measure, availability, as balance of rights G.4.4.2 GATS XIV and G.4.1-2 measures necessary to secure compliance with GATT-consistent measure (GATT XX(d)), alternative WTO-consistent measure, availability and G.4.4.3 two-tier analysis (justification under paras. (a)-(j)/compliance with chapeau) G.4.1.2 good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VC 26)) dispute settlement procedures, engagement in (DSU 3.10) P.3.1.14 obligation to articulate defence promptly and clearly B.3.3.15, D.2.2.23, O.1.15 interpretation of covered agreements, applicable law, Schedules of Concessions G.1.2.1.2 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines grammar, respect for G.1.3.5.1 multiple meanings G.1.2.1.2-3, I.3.2.10-11 object and purpose A.7.3.4.6 same or closely related phrases in different agreements G.4.1.1-2 same or closely related phrases in same agreement G.1.3.4.4 structure of agreement G.1.1.9, G.1.2.2.4 text/plain language G.1.3.5.2 interpretation of covered agreements, means context any agreement made between the parties (VC 31(2)(a)) or accepted by parties (VC 31(2)(b)) G.1.2.2.1-2, I.3.3.4-5 Central Product Classification (CPC) and Services Sectoral Classification List (W/120), whether G.1.2.2.1-2, I.3.3.4-5 Article as a whole G.1.3.4.5 dictionaries G.1.2.1.2, G.1.3.4.2, I.3.2.9-10 multiple authentic languages, non-authentic text, relevance G.1.2.1.2, I.3.2.10 preamble/chapeau of Article under discussion G.1.3.3.1, G.4.5.1-4 preparatory work, GATS G.1.2.2.10-11, G.1.2.2.12, G.1.3.4.6, G.1.3.5.4, I.3.10.14 subsequent practice which establishes parties’ agreement on interpretation (VC 31(3)(b)) agreement, need for G.1.2.2.9, I.3.9.6 common practice, need for G.1.2.2.9, I.3.9.6 2001 GATS Guidelines, whether G.1.2.2.9, I.3.9.6 consistency of practice, need for G.1.2.2.9, I.3.9.6 supplementary means (VC 32) in case of ambiguity G.1.2.2.10, I.3.10.13 interpretative document issued by party I.3.10.16 interpretation of covered agreements, specific terms and phrases “affecting”, GATS I C.7.19, G.1.1.8, R.2.3.15, T.6.3.11 “sector” (DSU 22.3(f)) G.1.2.2.4-5 “sector” (GATS XX) G.1.2.2.4-5 market access commitments (GATS XVI) measures not to be maintained unless otherwise specified in Schedule (GATS XVI:2) G.1.3.1.1 exhaustive list of restrictions covered by GATS XVI:1, whether G.1.3.2.1 inclusion of commitment to allow market access, need for G.1.3.3 limitations on number of service suppliers (GATS XVI:2(a)) G.1.3.4.1-6 Article to be read as a whole G.1.3.4.5 at or above zero G.1.3.3.1, G.1.3.4.6, T.1.2.8 exclusive service suppliers (GATS VIII:5) and G.1.3.4.1 “form” G.1.3.4.2-6 object and purpose of GATS and G.1.3.4.6 as quantitative limitation G.1.3.4.1-6 limitations on total number of service operations (GATS XVI:2(c)) grammatical structure G.1.3.5.1 as quantitative limitation G.1.3.5.2-5 text/plain language G.1.3.5.2 limitations on total value of service transactions (GATS XVI:2(b)) G.1.3.3.1 bound rates at or above zero G.1.3.3.1 measures directed at consumers G.1.3.6.1 modes of supply as defined in GATS I G.1.3.1.1-2 “no less favourable treatment” obligation (GATS XVI:1), under terms provided for in Schedule G.1.3.1.1 variety of permissible forms G.1.3.5.4 municipal law, interpretation M.5.12-14 order of analysis, GATS XIV (chapeau/exceptions) O.2.11 prompt and satisfactory resolution of disputes, Members’ right to (DSU 3) impairment of benefits by measures taken by another Member (DSU 3.3) attributability of measure to responding Member, need for C.7.19, G.1.1.8, R.2.3.15, T.6.3.11 measure as source of alleged impairment, need for C.7.19, G.1.1.8, R.2.3.15, T.6.3.11 request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2) identification of specific measure at issue “practice” as measure R.2.3.17, T.6.3.12 “total prohibition” R.2.3.16 legal basis of claim, specificity sufficient to present the problem clearly R.2.2.20 Schedules of Concessions (GATT II) interpretation and clarification T.1.2.8 ordinary customs duties in excess of those provided for in Schedule (GATT II:1(b)), zero rates, applicability to T.1.2.8 standard of review (DSU 11) “objective assessment of the facts” evidence, alleged disregard or distortion by panel G.4.5.4 assessment of legislation of complainant party, relevance G.4.4.5 discretion in selection of relevant evidence G.4.5.2, J.1.19 insufficiency of evidence, relevance S.7.2.6, S.7.2A.6, S.7.2A.6-7 wording of measure in absence of evidence S.7.2A.7 “objective assessment of matter before it” discretion in deciding which legal issues to address C.4.26, G.4.5.2, J.1.19, S.7.2.7 error of law, need to set out all matters considered, whether G.4.2.2 party’s failure to address issues allegedly overlooked G.4.5.3 ultra petita finding on provision not before it S.7.2.6 “such other findings as will assist the DSB” J.1.19 terms of reference of panels (DSU 7), “matter referred to the DSB”, as identified in DSU 6.2, measure at issue as S.7.2A.6-7 Working Procedures (panel) (DSU 12.1 and Appendix 3), high quality reports/avoidance of delay, flexibility in achieving balance (DSU 12.2) D.2.2.24-5, E.3.5 burden of proof defences and exceptions B.3.3.1 GATT XX B.3.3.1 onus probandi actori incumbit as general principle of evidence, defences/exceptions and B.3.3.1 competence (AB) completion of legal analysis (DSU 17.6) C.4.1 in case of disagreement with panel C.4.1 factual basis, contentiousness/omission/insufficiency of facts C.4.1 General Exceptions (GATT XX) chapeau application of measure as means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination G.3.11.4 “between countries where the same conditions prevail” G.3.12.1 between importing and exporting countries G.3.12.1 “disguised restriction on international trade” G.3.11.4, G.3.13 measures amounting to arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination as G.3.13 prevention of abuses of exceptions as objective G.3.11.1-2, G.3.13.1 reasonable application of exceptions, need for G.3.11.2 measures relating to the conservation of exhaustible natural resources (GATT XX(g)) compliance as condition of access to Member’s domestic market as jurisdictional limitation G.3.19 “made effective in conjunction with”, as balance between conservation and production/consumption G.3.8.1 “relating to” G.3.9.1-4 “primarily aimed at” distinguished G.3.9.3-4 two-tier analysis (justification under paras. (a)-(j)/compliance with chapeau) G.3.1.1 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.3.1.1, I.3.7.1 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines, effectiveness principle (ut res magis valeat quam pereat/effet utile) I.3.7.1 interpretation of covered agreements, specific terms and phrases, “relating to” (GATT XX(g)) G.3.9.1-4 multiple appeals (AB/WP 23), joinder S.3.1.1, W.2.8 order of analysis, GATT XX (chapeau compliance / GATT XX/exceptions) O.2.1 Working Procedures (appellate review) multiple appeals (AB/WP 23), joinder S.3.1.1, W.2.8 obligation to observe S.3.1.1, W.2.8 written responses (WP 28) W.2.12.1 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), determination of dumping (AD 2) calculation of dumping margins (AD 2.4) calculation of “all other” anti-dumping duty rate (AD 9.4), applicability to A.3.42.1 comparison of weighted average normal value with weighted average of all comparable export transactions A.3.42.1 calculation of normal value, eligible transactions, requirements (AD 2.1) affiliated party transactions A.3.5.2 comparability of price A.3.5.1 “like product” A.3.5.1 sale “destined for consumption in exporting country” A.3.5.1 sale “in ordinary course of trade” A.3.5.1 fair comparison (AD 2.4) A.3.6.0, A.3.12 affiliated party transactions A.3.6.1, A.3.12.1 “at same level of trade” requirement A.3.6.1, A.3.12.1 “normal value … in the ordinary course of trade” (AD 2.1) A.3.3 comparing prices, relevant factors A.3.3.3 scrutiny, rules governing A.3.3.4 sales transaction not “in the ordinary course of trade” affiliated party transactions A.3.4.1-2 distortion of normal value, Members’ discretion and A.3.4.2 sales above cost and A.3.9.1 sales below cost, method for determining whether (AD 2.2.1) A.3.4 alternative methods, possibility of A.3.9.1 transaction on terms and conditions incompatible with normal commercial practice A.3.3.2 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), determination of injury (AD 3) calculation of volume of dumped imports, “positive evidence” / “objective examination” requirement (AD 3.1), AD 17.6(ii), relevance A.3.60.3 evaluation of injury factors (AD 3.4) A.3.22.3-6 examination of relevance of factor not listed in AD 3.4, right to A.3.22.3 structure of domestic industry A.3.22.5 manner of evaluating causal relationship (AD 3.5) injurious effects of dumped goods and of other factors, need to distinguish (AD 3.5) A.3.24.3-5 non-attribution to dumped imports of injury caused by other factors (AD 3.5) A.3.24.1-5 “objective examination” requirement (AD 3.1) A.3.22.4 sectoral analysis, right to A.3.22.3 “positive evidence” / “objective examination” requirement (AD 3.1) “objective examination” A.3.17 evaluation of injury factors (AD 3.4) A.3.22.4 good faith/fairness and A.3.17.2 industry as a whole, need to examine A.3.17.3-4, A.3.22.6 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), evidentiary rules (AD 6) “ample opportunity to present in writing all evidence” (AD 6.1) extension “upon cause shown … whenever practicable” A.3.30.1, A.3.34.3 “reasonable period” (AD 6.8)/ “reasonable time” (Annex II, para. 1) and A.3.35.3 right to impose time-limits (AD 6.1.1) A.3.30 cooperation, standard allowance for/assistance with difficulties (AD 6.13) A.3.38.1, P.3.1.5 “best of its ability” (AD Annex VII, para. 5) A.3.36.2 good faith and P.3.1.5 facts available to investigating authority, right to use (AD 6.8/Annex II) A.3.33 in case of partial lack of necessary information A.3.36.3, A.3.42.1 failure to submit necessary information “in timely fashion” (Annex II, para. 3) and A.3.34 interpretation in light of AD 6.1.1, 6.8/Annex II, para. 1 A.3.34.2-3, A.3.35.3 as “reasonable period” / “reasonable time” A.3.34.3 failure to submit necessary information “within reasonable period” (AD 6.8)/ “reasonable time” (Annex II, para. 1) and A.3.33.1-2 information provided within reasonable period, investigating authorities’ obligation to use A.3.34.2-3 “less favourable result” as possible consequence of failure to cooperate (AD Annex VII, para. 7) A.3.36.1-3, A.3.43.1 standard of cooperation expected A.3.36.1-2 “reasonable period” balance between rights of investigating authorities and legitimate interests of parties A.3.35.2-3 flexibility A.3.35.1-2 relevant factors A.3.35.2 time-limits and A.3.35.3 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), imposition and collection of anti-dumping duties (AD 9) calculation of “all other” anti-dumping duty rate (AD 9.4) A.3.41 avoidance of prejudice to non-investigated exporters, failure to address A.3.43.2-3 comparison of all comparable transactions (AD 2.4), need for A.3.42.1 margins established under circumstances referred to in AD 6.8, exclusion A.3.41.1, A.3.42 method, absence of provision A.3.41.1 weighted average margin of dumping established with respect to investigated exporters as ceiling (AD 9.4(i)) A.3.41.1 zero/de minimis margins, exclusion A.3.41.1 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), standard/powers of review (AD 17.6) assessment of the facts (AD 17.6(i)) A.3.58.3, A.3.59.4-5 active review, need for S.7.1.6 DSU 11 compared S.7.1.6 interpretation of relevant provisions of AD (AD 17.6(ii)) distinguished A.3.58.3, S.7.1.5 “unbiased and objective” S.7.1.6 interpretation of relevant provisions of AD (AD 17.6(ii)) in accordance with customary rules of interpretation of public international law A.3.60.2 “admits of more than one permissible interpretation” A.3.60.2-3 DSU 11 compared S.7.1.7 objective assessment, relevance A.3.60.3, S.7.1.7 competence (AB) completion of legal analysis (DSU 17.6) C.4.13-14 in case of disagreement with panel C.4.14 factual basis, contentiousness/omission/insufficiency of facts C.4.13-14 good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VC 26)) determination of injury (AD 3) and A.3.17.2 as general principle of international law P.3.1.5 law P.3.1.5 investigation of dumping, standard of cooperation and P.3.1.5 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.3.60.2 DSU 3.2 A.3.60.2 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines multiple permissible interpretations A.3.60.2-3 compliance with one permissible interpretation, sufficiency A.3.60.2 “permissible” A.3.60.2 narrow/broad interpretation A.3.43.1 interpretation of covered agreements, means, context, surrounding language A.3.36.1 municipal law, as evidence of, compliance with international obligations, interpretation of legislation distinguished M.5.4 specific action against dumping (AD 18.1) or subsidy (SCM 32.1) A.3.60.2-3 standard of review (DSU 11) “objective assessment of matter before it” AD 17.6(i) compared S.7.1.6 AD 17.6(ii) compared A.3.60.3, S.7.1.7 factual and legal aspects, inclusion S.7.1.5 de novo review of facts, exclusion S.7.5.1-2 good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VC 26)), dispute settlement procedures, engagement in (DSU 3.10) P.3.1.4, S.1.19.5 investigation of conditions for safeguard measures, requirements (SG 3.1/SG 4.2(c)) dispute settlement proceedings distinguished S.1.19.4 findings and reasoned conclusions, covering pertinent issues of fact and law S.1.46.1 published report S.1.21.1-2 key elements conditions (SG 2.1/GATT XIX:(a)) S.1.21.1-2 unforeseen developments S.1.21.2, S.1.46.1 judicial economy J.1.12 “like or directly competitive product” (SG 2.1/SG 4.1(c)) S.1.3 “domestic industry”, as sole determinant (SG 4.1(c)) S.1.25.1-4 specific product, need for S.1.3.1, S.1.25.2 procedure, fair, prompt and effective resolution of disputes and, good faith and P.3.1.4 safeguard measures, conditions (SG 2) “like or directly competitive product” (SG 2.1) S.1.3 specific product, need for S.1.3.1 as pertinent issues of fact and law (SG 3.1) S.1.21.1-2 “such increased quantities” “as a result of unforeseen developments” (GATT XIX:1(a)) S.1.21.2, S.1.50.3 demonstration, need for S.1.50.3 as pertinent issue of fact and law S.1.50.3 decrease in import quantities at end of investigation period, relevance S.1.28.2 sufficient to cause serious injury or threat S.1.30.2 safeguard measures, determination of serious injury or threat thereof (SG 4), requirements “domestic industry” (SG 4.1(c)) S.1.25 “producers as a whole” S.1.25.5 evaluation of all relevant factors (SG 4.2(a)) S.1.2.1-2, S.1.26.5-6, S.7.4.2-3 as a whole S.1.27.2-4 data from recent past/throughout investigation period, relative importance S.1.28.1-2 “factors other than increased imports” (SG 4.2(b)) “at the same time” S.1.30.2 methodology S.1.30.2 non-attribution, need for demonstration of S.1.30.2, S.1.31.3-4 “of an objective and quantifiable nature” (SG 4.2(a)) S.1.27.1 reasoned and adequate explanation S.1.2.1-2, S.1.26.5, S.1.46.1, S.7.4.2, S.7.4.4, S.7.5.1 “serious injury” (SG 4.1(a)) S.1.23.1 “threat of serious injury” (SG 4.1(b)) S.1.24.1 “clearly imminent” S.1.24.1 safeguard measures, publication obligations (SG 4.2(c)), unforeseen developments, need to include S.1.46.1 safeguard measures, standard/powers of review assessment of the facts absence of facts S.1.31.4 de novo review, exclusion S.7.5.1 in-depth review of “reasoned and adequate” explanation, need for S.1.2.2, S.1.26.5-6, S.7.4.2, S.7.4.4, S.7.5.1 substitution of panel’s own assessment, exclusion S.1.2.1, S.7.5.1 existence of right coupled with exercise of right in conformity with SG S.1.26.5 standard of review (DSU 11) “objective assessment of the facts”, de novo review, exclusion S.7.5.1-2 “objective assessment of matter before it”, in-depth review of explanation, need for S.1.2.2, S.7.4.2-4, S.7.5.1 relevant factors, evaluation of all relevant factors, need for S.7.4.2 third party rights W.2.9.3 AB proceedings (WP 24) W.2.9.3 passive participation in oral hearings W.2.9.3 amicus curiae briefs A.2.1.7-10 NGO/private individual briefs A.2.1.7-10 discretionary power of panel to accept/reject A.2.1.7-10 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 A.3.58.1, A.3.63.1-2, S.7.1.4 appellate review (DSU 17), extension of deadline for circulation W.2.10.2.2 burden of proof, review of continuing need for countervailing duties (SCM 21.2) S.2.31.1-2 countervailing duties (SCM, Part V) review of need for continued imposition (SCM 21.2) S.2.31.1-3 burden/standard of proof S.2.31.3 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines, absence of provision, relevance A.2.1.7 judicial economy J.1.8 panel’s discretionary power to determine, which claims must be examined J.1.8 request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2), legal basis of claim, arguments distinguished C.1.7 SCM Agreement review of need for continued imposition of countervailing duties (SCM 21.2) distinguished S.2.31.3 standard of review, Declaration on Dispute Settlement Pursuant to the Agreement on Implementation of Art. VI of GATT 1994 (Anti-Dumping Agreement) or Part V of the SCM Agreement legal effect A.3.63.1 standard of review, absence of provision for A.3.63.1 subsidy, definition (SCM 1) conferral of benefit (SCM 1.1(b)) S.2.9.3-4 “benefit” S.2.9.4 recipient natural or legal person as S.2.9.3 need for S.2.9.3 Working Procedures (appellate review) determination by Appellate Body (DSU 17.9) A.2.1.7 fairness and orderly procedure, adoption of appropriate procedure (WP 16.1), re-hearing following death of member of division hearing appeal W.2.6.8 replacement on division (WP 13) W.2.5.1, W.2.6.8 standing/right to bring claim (DSU 3.7), Members of WTO, limitation to A.2.1.8 third party rights, panel proceedings (DSU 10 and Appendix 3), Members “having substantial interest in a matter before a panel”, limitation to (DSU 10.2) A.2.1.8 working schedule (WP 26), extension of deadline for circulation of AB report, death of member of division hearing appeal W.2.10.2.2 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), determination of injury (AD 3), evaluation of injury factors (AD 3.4), manner of evaluating causal relationship (AD 3.5), non-attribution to dumped imports of injury caused by other factors (AD 3.5), Agreement on Safeguards (SG 4.2(b)) compared S.1.43 applicable law, determination of serious injury or threat (SG 4) M.5.6, S.1.4.1 burden of proof prima facie case S.1.36.3 in rebuttal S.1.36.3 compensation for adverse effects of safeguard measures (SG 8.1) S.1.38.2, S.1.42.4 compensatory adjustment for modification of schedules (GATT XXVIII:2) S.1.38.2, S.1.42.4 compliance, WTO obligations, good faith/pacta sunt servanda principle S.1.42.4 good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VC 26)), compliance with WTO obligations S.1.42.4 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines object and purpose I.3.2.6 same or closely related phrases in same agreement S.1.13.1.2 text/plain language I.3.2.6 interpretation of covered agreements, means context I.3.2.6 title S.1.35.4 investigation of conditions for safeguard measures, requirements (SG 3.1/SG 4.2(c)) published report S.1.21.3 key elements conditions (SG 2.1/GATT XIX:(a)) S.1.21.3 serious injury or threat of S.1.21.3 municipal law, as applicable law, determination of serious injury or threat (SG 4) M.5.6, S.1.4.1 proportionality countermeasures/suspension of concessions (DSU 22.4) and P.3.6.2-3 as customary international law P.3.6.3 safeguard measures (SG 5.1) (“to the extent necessary”) and S.1.34.2-3 publication of analysis of case under investigation (SG 4(2)(c)), justification of application of safeguard measures (SG 5.1) and S.1.35.1, S.1.36.1 quota modulation (SG 5.2(b)) S.1.37 safeguard measures, characteristics, as balance between appropriate and legitimate right to protect domestic industry and obligation to maintain integrity of trade concessions S.1.38.2 safeguard measures, conditions (SG 2) parallelism between SG 2.1 and SG 2.2 S.1.13.1.2 prima facie failure to observe S.1.13.2.1 “product … being imported” S.1.13.1.2 as pertinent issues of fact and law (SG 3.1) S.1.21.3 separate determinations S.1.10.1-4 “such increased quantities” sufficient to cause serious injury or threat causal link, need to demonstrate S.1.31.1 “serious injury” and “threat”, whether mutually exclusive alternatives S.1.10 safeguard measures, customs unions and free trade areas (GATT XXIV) exception, applicability R.1.6.2, S.1.17.1 free trade areas S.1.17 safeguard measures, determination of serious injury or threat thereof (SG 4), requirements customs unions and free trade areas (GATT XXIV) exception and R.1.6.2 evaluation of all relevant factors (SG 4.2(a)) “factors other than increased imports” (SG 4.2(b)) application of measures “to the extent necessary” (SG 5.1) and S.1.36 non-attribution, need for demonstration of S.1.31.1, S.1.31.5-6 purpose of provision S.1.36.2 reasoned and adequate explanation S.1.31.5 “serious injury” (SG 4.1(a)) S.1.23.2-3 “material injury” (AD 3, SCM 15.7 and GATT VI) distinguished S.1.23.2 “serious injury” (SG 5.1) distinguished S.1.35.2 “serious injury” (SG 4.1(a))/ “threat of serious injury” (SG 4.1(b)) as continuum A.1.32A.2, S.1.23.2 quota modulation and (SG 5.2(b)) S.1.37.1 “serious injury”, higher threshold S.1.24.2 “threat of serious injury” (SG 4.1(b)) S.1.24.2 safeguard measures, developing countries and (SG 9) S.1.39 “applied” S.1.39.2 “against a product” S.1.39.2 expected effect of measure, relevance S.1.39.3 list of excluded countries, need for S.1.39.1 safeguard measures, level of concessions (SG 8) compensation for adverse effects (SG 8.1) S.1.38.2, S.1.42.4 “equivalent” S.1.38.2-3 adequate opportunity for prior consultations (SG 12.3) and S.1.42.3 safeguard measures, notification and consultation (SG 12) adequate opportunity for prior consultations (SG 12.3) S.1.42.2-4 good faith and S.1.42.4 time for S.1.42.3 amendments to measure subsequent to consultation, effect S.1.42.2 safeguard measures (Safeguards Agreement (SG/GATT XIX (emergency action))), application of measures (SG 5) imports, limitation to S.1.35.4 proportionality (“to the extent necessary”) (SG 5.1) S.1.34.2-3 causal link (SG 4.2(b)) and S.1.36 extent of injury as test S.1.34.3 justification, need for S.1.35 in case of quantitative restrictions (SG 5.1, second sentence) S.1.35.1, S.1.36.1 compliance with SG obligations as S.1.35.1, S.1.36.1 publication of analysis of case under investigation (SG 4(2)(c)) and S.1.35.1, S.1.36.1 limitation to share of injury caused by increased imports S.1.35.3 right to apply measure distinguished S.1.35.2 “serious injury” (SG 5.1)/ “serious injury” (SG 4.2(a)) distinguished S.1.35.2 quota modulation and (SG 5.2(b)) S.1.37 State responsibility, countermeasures for breach of international obligations, proportionality and P.3.6.3 Working Procedures (appellate review) withdrawal of appeal (AB/WP 30) W.2.13.1.2 conditioned on right to refile notice of appeal in accordance with WP 20 W.2.13.1.2 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), determination of dumping (AD 2) constituent elements A.3.61.8, S.2.36.4 intention of dumping, whether (AD 2/GATT VI:1) M.5.7 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), GATT 1994 VI and, dumping, constituent elements (AD 2/GATT VI:1), intention of dumping M.5.7 competence (AB), completion of legal analysis (DSU 17.6), factual basis, limitation to panel’s findings or undisputed facts in panel record S.3.3.11 competence (panels) notice of appeal, requirements (AB/WP 20(2)), objection to panel’s jurisdiction T.6.1.11 objections, requirements, notice of appeal, inclusion in J.2.1.15, O.1.8, T.6.1.11 obligation to examine at any stage during proceedings W.2.7.1.3 ex proprio motu J.2.1.15 compliance, WTO obligations, good faith/pacta sunt servanda principle P.3.1.10 countervailing duties (SCM, Part V), compliance with GATT VI:3 and SCM Agreement (SCM 10), permissible responses to countervailable subsidy S.2.36.10 good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VC 26)) compliance with WTO obligations P.3.1.10 violation of obligation, relevance to determination of good faith P.3.1.10 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines effectiveness principle (ut res magis valeat quam pereat/effet utile) I.3.7.9 meaning to be attributed to every word and phrase I.3.7.9 object and purpose P.1.3.1 text/plain language I.3.2.7 interpretation of covered agreements, means dictionaries I.3.2.7 footnotes to treaty A.3.61.14, S.2.36.9 legislative history (domestic) I.3.4.2 ambiguity, relevance in absence of I.3.4.2 conclusiveness I.3.4.2 investigation of dumping (AD 5)/subsidy (SCM 11) support of domestic industry, need for (AD 5.4/SCM 11.4) “expression of support” A.3.28.1, S.2.20.1 motives, relevance A.3.28.0, S.2.20.1 multiple complainants (DSU 9) procedure, panel’s discretion P.1.3.2 separate panel reports, right to (DSU 9.2) P.1.3 notice of appeal, requirements (AB/WP 20(2)) objection to panel’s jurisdiction J.2.1.15, O.1.8, W.2.7.1.3 right to defend interests and W.2.7.1.2 statement of allegations of errors on issues of law/legal interpretations (AB/WP 20(2)(d)) W.2.7.1.2 panel reports multiple complainants (DSU 9), separate panel reports, right to (DSU 9.2) P.1.3 prompt settlement (DSU 3.3) and P.1.3.1 prompt and satisfactory resolution of disputes, Members’ right to (DSU 3), separate panel reports in case of multiple complainants (DSU 9.2) and P.1.3.1 specific action against dumping (AD 18.1) or subsidy (SCM 32.1) S.2.36 requirements measure against dumping/subsidy A.3.61.5, A.3.61.11-13, S.2.36.1-2, S.2.36.6-8 adverse bearing A.3.61.11, S.2.36.6, T.6.2.18 design and structure of measure as evidence of protective application A.3.61.11-12, S.2.36.6-7 facilitation of exercise of WTO-consistent rights distinguished A.3.61.13, S.2.36.8 implications for conditions of competition, relevance A.3.61.12, S.2.36.7 measure specific to dumping/subsidy A.3.61.5-7 measures related to distinguished (AD 18.1 Footnote 24/SCM 32.1 Footnote 56) A.3.61.13, S.2.36.8 presence of constituent elements of dumping/subsidy A.3.61.7-9, S.2.36.4 as implied condition A.3.61.9-10 standard of review (DSU 11), “objective assessment of matter before it”, ultra petita finding on provision not before it T.6.2.18 subsidy, definition (SCM 1) A.3.61.8, S.2.36.3 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 T.6.2.18 Working Procedures (appellate review), replacement on division (WP 13) W.2.5.2 Working Procedures (panel) (DSU 12.1 and Appendix 3), panel’s discretion, multiple complainants and (DSU 9) P.1.3.2 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), determination of injury (AD 3) “injury” (AD 3, Footnote 9) A.3.15A.1 applicability to AD as a whole A.3.52A.1 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), evidentiary rules (AD 6) “ample opportunity to present in writing all evidence” (AD 6.1), extension “upon cause shown … whenever practicable” A.3.30.2 due process in case of failure to respond to notice of initiation A.3.31.3-6 in case of incomplete response to notice of initiation A.3.30.3-4 full opportunity for defence of interests, right to (AD 6.2) A.3.30.2, A.3.31.2-6 notification of interest, right to set time-limits/deemed waiver A.3.31.5-6 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), sunset review (AD 11.3) applicability of AD 3 (determination of injury) A.3.52B.1-2 cumulative assessment of volume and prices (AD 3.3) and A.3.21.5, A.3.48A.1-4 applicability of AD 3.3 A.3.48A.3 investigatory/adjudicatory functions, proactive role of investigating authorities A.3.48A.4 “likelihood” test continuance or recurrence of dumping A.3.46.3 company-specific basis determination of likelihood A.3.50.2-4, A.3.52.8 continuance or recurrence of injury “injury” (AD 3, Footnote 9) A.3.52A.1 timeframe A.3.52C.1-2 “likelihood” A.3.47.2 AD 6 provisions, applicability A.3.53.1-2 overall determination as basis A.3.52A.3-4 “positive evidence” / “objective examination” requirement (AD 3.1) A.3.47.3-4, A.3.48A.4, A.3.52.4-8 absolute certainty, relevance E.3.10 assumptions, reliance on A.3.52.8 relevant factors factors other than dumping margins/import volumes A.3.51.4 situation before and after anti-dumping duty order A.3.51.4 methodology, absence of provision A.3.52A.2 appellate review (DSU 17), AB reports, panel’s reliance on S.8.4 burden of proof, prima facie case, text of legislation, sufficiency B.3.2.12 competence (AB), completion of legal analysis (DSU 17.6), factual basis, limitation to panel’s findings or undisputed facts in panel record C.4.22-3, T.6.3.8 evidence, acceptability as statements to domestic courts E.3.9, S.7.3.20 statements to other international tribunals E.3.9, S.7.3.20 good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VC 26)), compliance with WTO obligations, measures challenged “as such” and L.1.13, R.2.3.12, T.6.3.7 interpretation of covered agreements, means, footnotes to treaty A.3.15A.1 legislation as such, right to challenge L.1.14-15 characterization by domestic authorities, relevance L.1.13, M.5.11, R.2.3.12, T.6.3.7 good faith and L.1.13, R.2.3.12, T.6.3.7 normative instrument L.1.15 serious implications of such a challenge L.1.12 municipal law, interpretation M.5.11 non-discriminatory administration of quantitative restrictions (GATT XIII), publication and administration of trade regulations (GATT X:3(a)), standard of proof P.5.3.2 precedent, AB reports S.8.4 request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2) identification of specific measure at issue, “practice” as measure T.6.3.8 legal basis of claim legislation “as such” claims L.1.13, R.2.3.12, T.6.3.7 nexus between challenged measure and provisions allegedly breached R.2.1.11 standard of review (DSU 11) “objective assessment of the facts” evidence, alleged disregard or distortion by panel obligation to examine and evaluate evidence S.7.2A.3-4 relevance, panel’s discretion to determine E.3.9 terms of reference of panels (DSU 7), “matter referred to the DSB”, as identified in DSU 6.2, measure at issue as S.7.2A.3-5 applicable law determination of serious injury or threat (SG 4) M.5.5 competence (AB) classification as issue of law or fact, compliance/consistency with treaty obligations M.5.5, S.3.3.8 completion of legal analysis (DSU 17.6) C.4.17-18 in case of agreement with panel C.4.18 factual basis contentiousness/omission/insufficiency of facts C.4.17-18 insufficient argument on novel issue C.4.17 competence (panels), claims against legislation as such M.1.5 compliance international obligations M.5.5 WTO obligations, good faith/pacta sunt servanda principle M.1.5 expropriation, non-recognition non-nationals, applicability to P.3.3.1 trademarks, simultaneous confiscation of same trademarks in expropriating State P.3.3.2 good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VC 26)), compliance with WTO obligations M.1.5 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines effectiveness principle (ut res magis valeat quam pereat/effet utile) I.3.7.8 meaning to be attributed to every word and phrase P.2.3.1 same or closely related phrases in different agreements N.1.14.1 interpretation of covered agreements, means, title T.9.3.1 legislation as such, right to challenge mandatory/discretionary legislation, whether distinguishable M.1.5 executive discretion and M.1.5 MFN treatment (TRIPS 4), differential treatment as discrimination M.2.3.1 municipal law, as evidence of, compliance with international obligations, panel’s assessment as matter for appellate review M.5.5 national treatment, regulatory discrimination (GATT III:4) “less favourable treatment” differentiation on the face of the statute N.1.14.2-6 formal differentiation in treatment, relevance N.1.14.2 TRIPS 3.1 compared N.1.14.1 national treatment (TRIPS 3) applicability (TRIPS 3.1, footnote 3) N.1.14.1 as fundamental principle N.1.14.1 “less favourable treatment” N.1.14.1 differentiation on the face of the statute N.1.14.2-6 formal differentiation in treatment, relevance N.1.14.2 GATT III:4 compared N.1.14.1 with regard to the protection of trade-related property rights N.1.14.1 trade names, protection Paris Convention (1967) (PC), PC 8 P.2.3.1-2, T.9.2.1-3 TRIPS T.9.1.2 trademarks (Paris Convention (1967) (PC)) expropriation P.3.3.1-2 registration in country other than that of applicant’s origin acceptance of trademark registered in country of origin according to domestic legislation in that country (PC 6quinquies) P.2.2.1 “as is” / “telle quelle” P.2.2.2-3 ownership issues and P.2.2.3 as right going beyond that granted to nationals P.2.2.1 right of Paris Union Members to determine conditions (Art. 6(1)) P.2.1.1 TRIPS enforcement of intellectual property rights (TRIPS, Part III) avoidance of barriers to trade and abuse of procedures (TRIPS 41.1) T.9.10.2 civil judicial procedures (TRIPS 42) T.9.10 “available” T.9.10.4, T.9.10.6 “right holders” T.9.10.6-7 “substantiate their claims” T.9.10.7 effective remedy, need for (TRIPS 41.1) T.9.10.2 “fair and equitable” requirement (TRIPS 41.2 and 42) T.9.10.3-8 international minimum standard (TRIPS 1.1) T.9.10.2, T.9.10.3, T.9.10.7 “intellectual property” T.9.10.1 limitation to categories identified in TRIPS section titles, whether T.9.1, T.9.3.1 “intellectual property conventions” (TRIPS 2) T.9.2 trademarks denial of protection on “other grounds” (TRIPS 15.2) T.9.4 owner exclusive rights (TRIPS 16.1) T.9.5 registration or use as basis T.9.5.0, T.9.6.1-2 “protectable subject-matter” (TRIPS 15) T.9.3 Working Procedures (appellate review), written responses (WP 28) W.2.12.7 Working Procedures (panel) (DSU 12.1 and Appendix 3), review of evidence S.3.3.8 abuse of rights/abus de droit, pacta sunt servanda/performance in good faith (VC 26) P.3.1.1 amicus curiae briefs A.2.1-6 NGO/private individual briefs A.2.1.1-6 discretionary power of panel to accept/reject A.2.1.2-6 conditions, panel’s right to attach A.2.1.4 consultation with parties A.2.1.4 as integral part of party’s submission A.2.1.1 party’s responsibility for A.2.1.1 due process (application of trade measures) D.2.1 General Exceptions (GATT XX) chapeau application of measure as means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination application of fair and just measure as G.3.11.7 “between countries where the same conditions prevail” G.3.12.2-4 between importing and exporting countries G.3.12.2 discrimination of substantive GATT obligations distinguished G.3.12.2 failure to consider appropriateness or regulatory programme as G.3.12.3-4 as balance between competing rights G.3.11.5-6 jurisdiction of Member, relevance G.3.10 nexus, need for G.3.10.3 measure relating to the conservation of exhaustible natural resources (GATT XX(d)) evolutionary nature G.3.7.2 living resources, applicability to G.3.7.1-2 measures relating to the conservation of exhaustible natural resources (GATT XX(g)), “relating to” G.3.9.5 two-tier analysis (justification under paras. (a)-(j)/compliance with chapeau) G.3.1.2, G.3.11.6 good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VC 26)) P.3.1.1 abuse of rights/abus de droit and P.3.1.1 as general principle of international law P.3.1.1 law P.3.1.1 information or technical advice, panel’s right to seek (DSU 13) panel’s rights not to seek A.2.1.3, E.3.3, S.4.4-5 to accept or reject requested information or advice A.2.1.3, A.2.1.5, E.3.3, S.4.4-5 to accept or reject unrequested information or advice S.4.5 to evaluate information or advice A.2.1.3, E.3.3 to evaluate source of information or advice A.2.1.3, E.3.3 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines evolutionary nature of GATT 1994 G.3.7.2 object and purpose G.3.7.3 parties’ intentions (VC 31(1)), preamble as reflection of G.3.7.3, I.3.6.1 text/plain language I.3.2.4 interpretation of covered agreements, means context I.3.2.4 preamble of agreement under consideration, as evidence of intention of parties G.3.7.3, I.3.6.1 interpretation of covered agreements, specific terms and phrases, “relating to” (GATT XX(g)) G.3.9.5 notice of appeal, requirements (AB/WP 20(2)) statement of allegations of errors on issues of law/legal interpretations (AB/WP 20(2)(d)) identification of facts requiring panel to draw inferences W.2.7.2.1 indication of appropriate factual or legal inferences W.2.7.2.1 legal argument in support of claim distinguished W.2.7.2.1 order of analysis, GATT XX chapeau (chapeau compliance/GATT XX/exceptions) compliance/GATT XX paras. (a)-(i) exceptions O.2.2 standard of review (DSU 11) “objective assessment of matter before it” applicability of and conformity with relevant covered agreements E.3.4 applicable law, panel’s right to determine E.3.4 standing/right to bring claim (DSU 3.7), Members of WTO, limitation to A.2.1.2 third party rights, panel proceedings (DSU 10 and Appendix 3), Members “having substantial interest in a matter before a panel”, limitation to (DSU 10.2) A.2.1.2 US — Gasoline (WT/DS2/AB/R), General Exceptions (GATT XX), measures relating to the conservation of exhaustible natural resources (GATT XX(g)), “made effective in conjunction with”, as balance between conservation and domestic production/consumption G.3.8.2 Working Procedures (appellate review), written responses (WP 28) W.2.12.5 amicus curiae briefs A.2.11 NGO/private individual briefs A.2.1.11 discretionary power of panel to accept/reject A.2.1.11 as integral part of party’s submission A.2.1.11 party’s responsibility for A.2.1.11 appellate review (DSU 17) AB reports adoption by DSB (DSU 17.14) R.4.3.1 panel’s reliance on S.8.2 compliance, international obligations M.5.3 environmental multilateral agreements arbitrary and unjustifiable discrimination, need to avoid E.2.1-4, G.3.12.5-7 Inter-American Convention for the Protection and Conservation of Sea Turtles (1996), as basis for comparison/benchmark E.2.4, G.3.12.7 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, Principle 12 and E.2.3, G.3.12.6 similar/comparable opportunities to negotiate, need for E.2.1-4, G.3.12.5 multilateral agreement, preference for E.2.2 General Exceptions (GATT XX) chapeau application of measure as means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination G.3.11.8 “between countries where the same conditions prevail” G.3.12.5-9 conditioning of market access on same programme/programme comparable in effectiveness G.3.12.8 flexibility to take into account conditions in different exporting Members G.3.12.9 conclusion of agreement distinguished E.2.2-3, G.3.12.5-6 “disguised restriction on international trade” G.3.11.8 similar/comparable opportunities to negotiate international agreement, need for E.2.1-4, G.3.12.5 good faith and E.2.1-2, G.3.12.5, P.3.1.8 multilateral agreement, preference for E.2.2, G.3.12.6 good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VC 26)) equality of parties in respect of P.3.1.8 negotiation of international agreements E.2.1-2, G.3.12.5 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines, legitimate expectations, relevance, panel reports and S.8.2 municipal law, as evidence of, compliance with international obligations, interpretation of legislation distinguished M.5.3 panel reports legal status adopted reports S.8.2 unadopted reports S.8.2 precedent AB reports S.8.2 panel reports, adopted reports S.8.2 prompt and satisfactory resolution of disputes, Members’ right to (DSU 3), review of implementation of DSB rulings and R.4.3.1 review of implementation of DSB rulings (DSU 21.5) Appellate Body reports and (DSU 17.14) R.4.3.1 competence of DSU 21.5 (compliance) panel determination of consistency of measures taken to comply with WTO obligations, re-examination of aspects of new measures that were unchanged part of original measure R.4.3.1 limitation to claims at time of referral to review panel R.4.2.2 “measures taken to comply”, measure subject of original dispute distinguished R.4.2.2 as new claim/reassertion of old R.4.2.2 prompt and satisfactory resolution of disputes, Members’ right to (DSU 3) and R.4.3.1 standard of review (DSU 11), “objective assessment of the facts”, evidence, alleged disregard or distortion by panel, hypothetical evidence S.7.3.12 third party rights W.2.9.4 AB proceedings (WP 24) W.2.9.4 passive participation in oral hearings W.2.9.4 Working Procedures (appellate review), oral hearing (WP 27), change of date W.2.11.1.2 amicus curiae briefs A.2.1.13 NGO/private individual briefs A.2.1.13 arguments not addressed or adopted by participants or third parties A.2.1.13 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), determination of injury (AD 3), “positive evidence” / “objective examination” requirement (AD 3.1), “objective examination”, extrapolation of examined producer/exporter findings to non-examined producers/exporters (AD 6.10) S.2.27.1 Footnote 189 competence (AB) completion of legal analysis (DSU 17.6) C.4.20 factual basis alternative factual findings prepared by panel C.4.20 contentiousness/omission/insufficiency of facts C.4.20 countervailing duties (SCM, Part V) aggregate investigation, sufficiency (SCM 19.3) S.2.27.1-2 compliance with GATT VI:3 and SCM Agreement (SCM 10) S.2.41.4-5 level, amount of existing subsidy, limitation to, calculation on per unit basis S.2.28 non-discriminatory basis (SCM 19.3) S.2.27 preconditions (SCM 19.1), injury to domestic industry S.2.1.4 as remedy to offset benefits of subsidies S.2.1.4 export subsidy, definition, GATT VI:4/SCM 10 and 32.1, compatibility S.2.41.4, S.2.41.5 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines effectiveness principle (ut res magis valeat quam pereat/effet utile), multiple authentic languages and (VC 33(3)) I.3.11.3 multiple authentic languages (VC 33) I.3.11.3 effectiveness principle and I.3.11.3 presumption of same meaning (VC 33(3)) I.3.11.3 narrow/broad interpretation S.2.1.3 ordinary meaning I.3.2.8 text/plain language I.3.2.8 interpretation of covered agreements, means context, GATT VI/SCM Agreement, interrelationship S.2.41.4-5 dictionaries I.3.2.8 preparatory work, SCM Agreement S.2.3.1 n. 35 interpretation of covered agreements, phrases, “goods” (SCM 1.1(a)(iii)) S.2.1.2, S.2.6 legislation as such, right to challenge, characterization by domestic authorities, relevance M.5.10 SCM Agreement calculation of subsidy in terms of benefit to recipient (SCM 14) adequacy of remuneration (SCM 14(d)) S.2.23 “adequate” S.2.23.1 “in relation to” S.2.23.3 “market conditions” S.2.23.2 private prices/government role in market, relevance S.2.23.3-4, S.2.24 “remuneration” S.2.23.1 broad interpretation, need for S.2.1.3 method, right to choose (SCM 14, chapeau) S.2.22 object and purpose, balanced framework of rights and obligations relating to countervailing duties S.2.1.3-4 subsidy, definition (SCM 1) financial contribution (SCM 1.1(a)(1)) direct transfer of funds (SCM 1.1(a)(1)) S.2.3.1 “bestowed directly or indirectly” (SCM 10, Footnote 36/GATT VI:3) S.2.43.1-3 foregoing of revenues otherwise due (SCM 1.1(a)(1)(ii)) S.2.3.1 government measures not amounting to S.2.3.1 n. 35 provision of goods or services (SCM 1.1(a)(1)(iii)) S.2.1.2, S.2.3.1 “goods” S.2.6 government purchases S.2.3.1, S.2.6.1 “provision” S.2.7 severability of goods attached to land, relevance S.2.6.2-4 transfer of economic resources from grantor to recipient for less than full consideration S.2.23.1 income or price support (SCM 1.1(a)(2)) S.2.3.1 pass-through of indirect input subsidy to countervailed product, need for (SCM 1.1/GATT VI:3) S.2.10.0, S.2.43 simultaneous fulfilment of all criteria, relevance S.2.7.2 Working Procedures (appellate review) replacement on division (WP 13) W.2.5.3 withdrawal of appeal (AB/WP 30) W.2.13.1.7 conditioned on right to refile notice of appeal in accordance with WP 20 W.2.13.1.7 working schedule (WP 26), modification in exceptional circumstances at request of parties, participants or third participants (WP 16.2) W.2.10.1.4 WTO Agreement, conflict between constituent covered agreements, precedence (WTO, Annex 1A) S.2.41.4 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), determination of dumping (AD 2) calculation of dumping margins (AD 2.4) actual product under investigation/type or model, distinction A.3.14.8-9 comparison of weighted average normal value with weighted average of all comparable export transactions A.3.14.7, A.3.14.9 multiple averaging (AD 2.4.2) A.3.14.6, A.3.14.9-11 product types/product as a whole (AD 2.4.2) A.3.60.5 “zeroing” A.3.14.11 omission of “comparison”, relevance A.3.9A.1-2 sales transaction not “in the ordinary course of trade” “consider all available evidence on the proper allocation of costs” (AD 2.2.1.1) “all available evidence” A.3.9A.2 “consider” A.3.9A.1-2 “reasonably reflect” the costs of production (AD 2.2.1.1) A.3.9B.1-2 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), determination of injury (AD 3), calculation of volume of dumped imports, “positive evidence” / “objective examination” requirement (AD 3.1), AD 17.6(ii), relevance A.3.60.5 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), evidentiary rules (AD 6), individual examination of all producers, alternatives in case of impracticability (AD 6.10) 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), zero/de minimis margins, exclusion A.3.14.10 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.3.60.5 appellate review (DSU 17), AB reports, panel’s reliance on S.8.3 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.3.60.5 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines multiple permissible interpretations, “permissible” A.3.60.5 same or closely related phrases in same agreement A.3.9A.1 precedent, AB reports S.8.3 Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD), determination of injury (AD 3) evaluation of injury factors (AD 3.4) manner of evaluating causal relationship (AD 3.5) collective effect, whether examination required A.3.26.4 evaluation of factors known not to exist A.3.26.4 applicable law, determination of serious injury or threat (SG 4) S.1.20.1-2 burden of proof, unforeseen developments, safeguard measures (GATT XIX:1(a)) S.1.22.3 competence (AB) completion of legal analysis (DSU 17.6) C.4.19 in case of agreement with panel C.4.19 factual basis, contentiousness/omission/insufficiency of facts C.4.19 inter-dependent assumptions, effect of panel’s reliance on O.2.5 judicial economy and S.1.32.3 de novo review of facts, exclusion S.7.5.3-4 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines ordinary meaning S.1.8.2 same or closely related phrases in same agreement S.1.14.1 interpretation of covered agreements, phrases, “conclusion” (SG 3.1) S.1.22.1 interpretation of covered agreements, specific terms and phrases, “reasoned” (SG 3.1) S.1.22.1 investigation of conditions for safeguard measures, requirements (SG 3.1/SG 4.2(c)) S.1.18 detailed analysis S.1.18.1, S.7.5.3 findings and reasoned conclusions S.1.18.1, S.1.22.0, S.7.5.3-4 broad/narrow grouping explanations, cross-application S.1.20.2 “conclusion” S.1.22.1 covering pertinent issues of fact and law S.1.18.1-2, S.1.33.1, S.1.46.2-3 demonstration of relevance of factors examined S.1.18.1 “reasoned” S.1.22.1 published report S.1.18.1, S.1.21.4 form, freedom of choice S.1.21.4 key elements reasoned conclusions S.1.22 unforeseen developments S.1.46.2-3, S.1.47.1 “set forth” S.1.22.1 judicial economy appellate review and S.1.32.3 inter-dependent assumptions, reliance on O.2.4, S.1.32.1 municipal law, as applicable law, determination of serious injury or threat (SG 4) S.1.20.1-2 notice of appeal, requirements (AB/WP 20(2)), statement of allegations of errors on issues of law/legal interpretations (AB/WP 20(2)(d)), allegation of panel’s failure to make objective assessment (DSU 11), need for specific reference W.2.7.5.4 order of analysis, assumptions, panel’s right to use, inter-dependent assumptions O.2.5 panel reports, rationale, need for (DSU 12.7) P.1.1.6 publication of analysis of case under investigation (SG 4(2)(c)) S.1.33 safeguard measures, characteristics, exceptional nature of remedy S.1.45.2 safeguard measures, conditions (SG 2) exceptional conditions, need for S.1.45.2 existence of all requirements S.1.1.2 “is being imported” (SG 2.1), as sudden and recent increase S.1.6.2 “like or directly competitive product” (SG 2.1), specific product, need for S.1.49.1-3 parallelism between SG 2.1 and SG 2.2 S.1.13.1.3 irrespective of its source, “product … being imported” S.1.13.1.3 as pertinent issues of fact and law (SG 3.1) S.1.18.2, S.1.33.1 separate determinations S.1.15 “such increased quantities” “as a result of unforeseen developments” (GATT XIX:1(a)) S.1.6.2-3, S.1.50.4-5 “as a result of” S.1.48 burden of proof S.1.22.3 demonstration, need for S.1.50.4-5 as pertinent issue of fact and law S.1.50.4-5 “such product” S.1.49 decrease in import quantities at end of investigation period, relevance S.1.8.2-3 “rate and amount of the increase … in absolute and relative terms” (SG 4.2(a)) S.1.7.3-4 “relative to domestic production” S.1.9.1 sufficient to cause serious injury or threat S.1.6.2 causal link, need to demonstrate S.1.31.7 trends, need to examine S.1.7.2-4 safeguard measures, determination of serious injury or threat thereof (SG 4), requirements applicable law S.1.20.1-2 evaluation of all relevant factors (SG 4.2(a)) “factors other than increased imports” (SG 4.2(b)) imports excluded from safeguard measure as S.1.14.1 non-attribution, need for demonstration of S.1.14.2, S.1.31.7 “of an objective and quantifiable nature” (SG 4.2(a)) S.1.31.7 reasoned and adequate explanation S.1.2.3, S.1.14.1-2, S.1.31.7, S.1.46.2-3 safeguard measures, publication obligations (SG 4.2(c)) S.1.33 interpretation by reference to SG 3 (investigation) S.1.33.1 unforeseen developments, need to include S.1.33.1 safeguard measures, standard/powers of review assessment of the facts in-depth review of “reasoned and adequate” explanation, need for S.1.2.3, S.1.22.1-2, S.1.46.3 decrease in imports (SG 2.1) S.1.8.3 as preliminary to determination of causal link S.1.32.2 standard of review (DSU 11) “objective assessment of the facts” de novo review, exclusion S.7.5.3-4 inter-dependent assumptions and O.2.5 “objective assessment of matter before it”, in-depth review of explanation, need for S.1.2.3, S.1.22.1-2, S.7.5.3-4 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines effectiveness principle (ut res magis valeat quam pereat/effet utile) I.3.7.3 ordinary meaning I.3.7.3 publication and administration of trade regulations (GATT X), measures of general application (GATT X:11) P.5.2 retroactivity (trade measures) (ATC 6.10) R.3.0, T.7.7 Textiles and Clothing Agreement (ATC), transitional safeguards (ATC 6) provisional application (ATC 6.11) T.7.8 retroactivity (ATC 6.10) R.3.0, T.7.7 Working Procedures (appellate review), written responses (WP 28) W.2.12.3 Agreement on Agriculture (AG) domestic support commitments (AG 6) as quantitative limitation (AG 6.3) A.1.14A.1 SCM 3.1(b) (“subsidies contingent … upon the use of domestic over imported goods”) distinguished A.1.14A.2-3, I.3.7.10 GATT 1994 and (AG 21.1) A.1.38.2 market access concessions and commitments (AG 4.1) and A.1.8.3 primacy of AG A.1.38.2 specific provisions in AG dealing with same matter, need for A.1.38.2-9 interpretation, guidelines object and purpose A.1.29B.1 consistency with object and purpose of Article 10 as a whole A.1.33A.4 same or closely related phrases in different agreements A.1.4.2, A.1.32A.2 same or closely related phrases in same agreement A.1.5A.1, A.1.34D.3.1-2 interpretation, means context Article as a whole (Annex 2, para. 6) A.1.34D.2.6 SCM Agreement A.1.38.12, S.2.12.7 treaty as a whole including annexes A.1.34C.5.1 preamble/chapeau of Article under discussion A.1.34C.2.5-6 object and purpose, prevention of circumvention of export subsidy commitments (AG 10) A.1.33A.5 SCM Agreement and AG 6 and SCM 3.1(b) distinguished A.1.14A.2-3, A.1.34E.3-5, I.3.7.10 primacy of AG (SCM 3.1) A.1.38.11-13 appellate review (DSU 17), extension of deadline for circulation W.2.10.2.5 burden of proof completion of legal analysis by AB and B.3.1.17, C.4.25 onus probandi actori incumbit as general principle of evidence B.3.4.5 reversal in respect of circumvention of export subsidy commitments (AG 10.3) A.1.29B.1, A.1.34.9-11 “establish” A.1.34.9 SCM claims, applicability to A.1.34.10, A.1.38.1.15, B.3.4.3, B.3.4.4, S.2.39.2-8 unscheduled products, applicability to A.1.34.11, B.3.4.4 competence (AB) classification as issue of law or fact compliance/consistency with treaty obligations S.3.2.5, S.3.3.12, S.7.3.21, S.7.3.23 panel’s application of law S.2.39.5, S.3.3.17, S.7.3.24 world market, existence and competition in S.3.3.13-14 completion of legal analysis (DSU 17.6) in absence of request from party C.4.25, S.3.2.5, S.3.3.12 burden of proof and B.3.1.17, C.4.25 factual basis, limitation to panel’s findings or undisputed facts in panel record C.4.24, T.6.3.8 issues of law/legal interpretations (DSU 17.6) S.3.2.5, S.3.3.12, S.7.3.21, S.7.3.23 “covered in the panel report” S.3.1.6 “developed by the panel” S.3.1.6 obligation to address each of issues raised under DSU 12.6 during appellate proceedings (DSU 17.12) S.3.1.6, S.3.4.1-7 competence of panels and AB (DSU 3.2), to clarify existing provisions, outside context of resolving particular dispute S.3.4.5 consultations (DSU 4) clarification of issues and/opportunity to define scope of dispute C.7.14, C.7.18, R.2.1.12 confidentiality (DSU 4.6) C.7.16 establishment of panel, as prerequisite, scope of request for establishment of panel and request for consultations distinguished C.7.18 measure at issue (DSU 4.4) expired measure C.7.12-15, R.2.3.13-14, T.6.3.9-10 as identified in request for establishment of panel (DSU 6.2), need for identity with, whether C.7.18 measure affecting the operation of covered agreement (DSU 4.2) C.7.12, R.2.3.13, T.6.3.9 “affecting” C.7.11 request for (DS 4.4) as determinant of scope C.7.16, R.2.1.12 identification of measures at issue C.7.17 notification to DSB C.7.16 writing, need for C.7.16 domestic support commitments (AG 6), SCM 3.1(b) (“subsidies contingent … upon the use of domestic over imported goods”) distinguished A.1.14A.2-3, A.1.34E.3-5, A.1.38.2-12, I.3.7.10 domestic support measures, calculation of Aggregate Measurement of Support (AMS) (AG Annex 3) applicability to non-”green box” support (AG 13(b)(ii)) A.1.34C.5.1 measures directed at processors benefitting producers (para. 7) A.1.34E.1-5 inclusion in AMS limited to portion benefitting producer A.1.34E.2 domestic support measures, exemption from GATT XVI and SCM Part III measures (AG 13) (“due restraint” clause) “green box” support (AG 13(a)) A.1.34C.1.1-2 non-”green box” support (AG 13(b)) A.1.34C.1.2, A.1.34C.2, A.1.34C.2.1-6, A.1.34C.3.1-4 “such measures do not grant support to a specific commodity in excess of” (AG 13(b)(ii)) A.1.34C.2.1-6, A.1.34C.3.1-4 actual support, need for A.1.34C.3.1 calculation method (AMS methodology (AG Annex 3)) A.1.34C.5.1 “commodity” A.1.34C.2.2 “grant” and “decided” distinguished A.1.34C.4.1-2 “specific” A.1.34C.2.3-4, A.1.34C.3.1-4 “such measures” A.1.34C.2.5-6 “support” A.1.34C.2.2 domestic support measures, exemption from reduction commitments (AG Annex 2) (“green box”) A.1.34C.1.1-2 decoupled income support (Annex 2, para. 6) A.1.34C.1.2, A.1.34D.2.1-9 amount of payments and type or volume of production, separation requirement (Annex 2, para. 6(b)) A.1.34D.2.1-9 lawful production, limitation to A.1.34D.2.9 “no production” (Annex 2, para. 6(e)) distinguished A.1.34D.2.8 structural adjustment assistance (Annex 2, para. 11) distinguished A.1.34D.3.1-2 clearly-defined criteria in defined period requirement (Annex 2, para. 6(a)) A.1.34D.2.1 “fundamental requirement” (Annex 2, para. 1) A.1.34D.1.1-2 structural adjustment assistance (Annex 2, para. 11), requirement not to produce a particular product, limitation to A.1.34D.3.1-2 export subsidy commitments, prevention of circumvention (AG 10.1) “applied in a manner which results in, or which threatens to lead to, circumvention …” export credit guarantees A.1.32.5, A.1.33A.9 legal entitlement/discretionary element, relevance A.1.32A.5, M.1.10 “circumvention” actual circumvention insufficiency of undisputed facts A.1.32.7 obligation of Panel to establish in respect of each allegation A.1.32.6 threat of circumvention A.1.32A.1-8, M.1.10 obligation to take precautionary steps, whether A.1.32A.4, A.1.32A.8 relevance where actual circumvention already established A.1.32A.8 export credit guarantees (AG 10.2) analysis of claims relating to as preliminary to consideration of compliance with AG 10.1 A.1.33A.10 conformity after international agreement on disciplines A.1.33A.1 obligations prior to agreement A.1.33A.5, A.1.33A.7 preparatory work A.1.33A.7 development of internationally agreed disciplines A.1.33A.1 “except as provided in the Agreement on Agriculture” (SCM 3.1(b)), applicability S.2.11.2 exception to AG 10.1, whether A.1.33A.2-9, A.1.38.13 “export subsidies not listed in Article 9.1”, export credit guarantee A.1.4.4, A.1.32.5, A.1.33.2, A.1.33A.2-9, A.1.33A.3 food aid transactions (AG 10.4) A.1.29B.1, A.1.32B.1, A.1.33A.6, A.1.34A.1 exception to AG 10.1, whether A.1.34B.1-2 “non-commercial transactions”, food aid A.1.32B.1 export subsidy, definition “contingent upon export performance” (AG 1(e)/SCM 3.1(a)) A.1.4.2-4, A.1.38.12, S.2.12.7-12 burden of proof legislation, regulation or other legal instrument constituting measure as evidence of S.2.13.5 requirement to show proof of exportation, relevance A.1.4.3, A.1.16A.1, S.2.12.12 in case of subsidy available to property produced either within or outside subsidising State S.2.12.9-12 “contingent” S.2.12.8 eligibility of domestic users for payments under different conditions, relevance A.1.4.3, S.2.12.9, S.2.12.12 “in law or in fact”, “tied to” (SCM 3.1(a), Footnote 4) S.2.12.8 Illustrative List of Export Subsidies (SCM Annex I) export credit guarantee or insurance (item (j)) S.2.9.10, S.2.39.2-8 as contextual guidance for analysis of AG 10.2 claims A.1.34.10, A.1.38.14, B.3.4.3 failure to cover long-term operating costs and losses (item (j)) S.2.39.2-7 non-exhaustive nature of AG 1(e) A.1.4.4, A.1.33A.3 implementation of panel or AB recommendations (DSU 19.1) expired measures, applicability to I.1 right of panel or AB to make suggestions I.2 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines effectiveness principle (ut res magis valeat quam pereat/effet utile), meaning to be attributed to every word and phrase A.1.38.10, I.3.7.10 multiple authentic languages (VC 33), presumption of same meaning (VC 33(3)) I.3.11.5, S.2.19B.3.1 object and purpose consistency with object and purpose of Article as a whole A.1.33A.4 preamble as evidence of A.1.29B.1 ordinary meaning A.1.32A.1, A.1.32A.4, C.7.12, M.1.10 “market” S.2.19B.1.3-5 “suppression” O.2.9, S.2.19B.3.1, S.2.19B.4.1-2 same or closely related phrases in different agreements A.1.4.2, A.1.32A.2 context, relevance S.2.19B.5.3 same or closely related phrases in same agreement A.1.5A.1, A.1.34D.3.1-2 interpretation of covered agreements, means context AG 2/SCM Agreement Illustrative List A.1.34.10, A.1.38.14, B.3.4.3 Article as a whole A.1.34D.2.6 treaty/treaties as a whole A.1.34C.5.1 dictionaries S.2.19B.1.3 preamble/chapeau of Article under discussion A.1.34C.2.5-6, A.1.38.8 preparatory work, Agreement on Agriculture (AG) A.1.33A.7, I.3.10.11 subsequent practice which establishes parties’ agreement on interpretation (VC 31(3)(b)), Members’ practice in notifying export credit guarantee programmes, whether I.3.9.6 supplementary means (VC 32), in case of ambiguity I.3.10.11 title A.1.29B.1 interpretation of covered agreements, specific terms and phrases “affecting”, DSU 4.2 C.7.11 “resulted” SCM 6.1 S.2.19B.8.3 “threat” (AG 10.1) A.1.32A.1, M.1.10 judicial economy S.3.2.6, S.3.4.2 panel’s discretionary power to determine which claims must be examined J.1.15-18, S.2.9.10, S.2.39.8 “positive solution to dispute” requirement and S.3.4.1, S.3.4.3-7 least developed countries, special dispute settlement procedures (DSU 24), particular consideration to be given to special situation of (DSU 24.1) L.1 market access concessions and commitments (AG 4.1), consistency with GATT XIII A.1.8.3, A.1.38.9 “measure” DSU 3.3, expired measure C.7.15 DSU 19.1, expired measure I.1 mootness of panel findings, judicial economy and M.3.4-6 notice of appeal, requirements (AB/WP 20(2)), statement of allegations of errors on issues of law/legal interpretations (AB/WP 20(2)(d)), illustrative list, sufficiency W.2.7.3.3 order of analysis panel’s right to determine O.2.10 SCM 6.3(c) (existence of price suppression/price suppression as result of subsidy) O.2.9 panel reports adoption by DSB (DSU 16.4), findings unchallenged by parties and S.2.19A.2 rationale, need for (DSU 12.7) S.2.19B.5.6, S.7.3.22 prompt and satisfactory resolution of disputes, Members’ right to (DSU 3) impairment of benefits by measures taken by another Member (DSU 3.3) S.3.4.4 recommendations and rulings of DSB (DSU 3.4) S.3.4.1, S.3.4.4-7 SCM Agreement consultations (SCM 4.1-4.4), “statement of available evidence” (SCM 4.2) E.3.11, S.2.18.3 interpretation, guidelines ordinary meaning O.2.9, S.2.19B.3.1 same or closely related phrases in same agreement S.2.19B.6.3 remedies (SCM 7), removal of adverse effects (SCM 7.8), expired measure, applicability to I.1 separate opinion (AB/WP 3.2/DSU 17.11) W.2.3A.1-2 serious prejudice (SCM 5(c)) displacement of or impediment to imports (SCM 6.3(b)), “over an appropriately representative period” S.2.19B.4 evidence of, information submitted to or obtained by panel including information submitted under SCM Annex V S.2.19B.6.3-4 “market” S.2.19B.1.1-6 “in the same market” S.2.19B.1.4-6 pass-through of indirect subsidies and S.2.10.3, S.2.19B.7.1-2 price suppression as effect of subsidy (SCM 6.3(c)) “effect of subsidy” (causal link) S.2.19B.5.1-5 time limitation, whether S.2.19B.8.1-5 as evidence ipso facto of serious prejudice under SCM 5(c) S.2.19A.1-2 methodology for determining S.2.19B.4.1-2, S.2.19B.5, S.2.19B.5.1-5 magnitude of subsidy, relevance S.2.19B.6.1-4 panel’s discretion S.2.19B.1 relevant factors S.2.19B.5.1-5 order of analysis O.2.9, S.2.19A.1, S.2.19B.3.1 “otherwise” O.2.9 price depression/suppression distinguished S.2.19B.4.1-2 relevant market S.2.19B.1.1-6 relevant price S.2.19B.2.1 “significant” S.2.19B.4.1 “suppression” O.2.9, S.2.19B.3.1 “resulted” (SCM 6.1) S.2.19B.8.3 standard of review (DSU 11) in absence of party’s claim relating to S.3.2.4-5, S.7.3.21, S.7.3.23, W.2.7.5.6 “objective assessment of the facts” evidence, alleged disregard or distortion by panel discretion in assessment of evidence S.7.3.25 discretion in selection of relevant evidence S.3.3.16 independence in evaluating S.3.3.15 obligation to gather and analyze factual data S.2.19B.5.6, S.7.3.22 standing/right to bring claim (DSU 3.7), positive solution as aim S.3.4.1, S.3.4.5 subsidies, prohibited (SCM, Part II) “contingent upon the use of domestic over imported products” (SCM 3.1(b)) S.2.15.3 “except as provided in the Agreement on Agriculture” (SCM 3.1(a)), export credit guarantees, applicability to S.2.11.2 “except as provided in the Agreement on Agriculture” (SCM 3.1(b)) A.1.38.8, S.2.14A.1-7 subsidy, definition (SCM 1) conferral of benefit (SCM 1.1(b)), export credit guarantee S.2.9.10 pass-through of indirect input subsidy to countervailed product, need for (SCM 1.1/GATT VI:3) S.2.10.3, S.2.19B.7.1 serious prejudice (SCM 5(c) and 6.3(c)) distinguished S.2.10.3, S.2.19B.7.1-2 terms of reference of panels (DSU 7), request for establishment of panel as basis R.2.1.12 Working Procedures (appellate review), object and purpose, fair, prompt and effective resolution of disputes B.3.1.17, C.4.25 competence (AB), classification as issue of law or fact, credibility and weight of evidence S.3.3.7 due process (dispute settlement proceedings), opportunity to respond to evidence/presentations of other parties S.1.19.2 inferences from party’s refusal to provide information, panel’s right to draw I.1.3-6 panel’s discretion and I.1.4, I.1.6 panel’s obligation to make objective assessment of facts (DSU 11) and I.1.3 failure to draw inferences as error of law I.1.5-6 refusal to provide information as a “fact” I.1.5-6 information or technical advice, panel’s right to seek (DSU 13) refusal to provide, panel’s right to draw inferences I.1.3-6 prompt and satisfactory resolution of disputes, Members’ right to (DSU 3), effect on I.1.3-6 interpretation of covered agreements, guidelines ordinary meaning S.1.19.1 same or closely related phrases in same agreement S.1.13.1.1 interpretation of covered agreements, specific terms and phrases, “investigation” S.1.19.1 investigation of conditions for safeguard measures, requirements (SG 3.1/SG 4.2(c)) evaluation of all factors S.1.19.3 obligation of competent authorities to seek information additional to that supplied by interested parties S.1.26.2 interested parties notification to S.1.19.2 opportunity to respond to presentations of other parties S.1.19.2 opportunity to submit evidence and views S.1.19.2 judicial economy J.1.11 notice of appeal, requirements (AB/WP 20(2)) statement of allegations of errors on issues of law/legal interpretations (AB/WP 20(2)(d)) I.1.6 explanation for allegation of error I.1.6 identification of facts requiring panel to draw inferences I.1.6 indication of appropriate factual or legal inferences I.1.6 prompt and satisfactory resolution of disputes, Members’ right to (DSU 3), refusal of party to provide information, effect I.1.3-6 safeguard measures, conditions (SG 2) causation (SG 2.1) “imports” / “conditions” S.1.11.1 relevant factors (SG 4.2(a))/ “under such conditions” (SG 2.1), equivalence S.1.12.1 parallelism between SG 2.1 and SG 2.2 S.1.13.1.1 “product … being imported” S.1.13.1.1 “such increased quantities”, sufficient to cause serious injury or threat S.1.30.1 safeguard measures, determination of serious injury or threat thereof (SG 4), requirements evaluation of all relevant factors (SG 4.2(a)) S.1.26.2-4 “factors other than increased imports” (SG 4.2(b)) “at the same time” S.1.29.2-3 methodology S.1.30.1 non-attribution, need for demonstration of S.1.30.1, S.1.31.2 obligation of competent authorities to seek information additional to that supplied by interested parties S.1.26.2 “under such conditions” (SG 2.1), equivalence S.1.12.1 safeguard measures, level of concessions (SG 8) “equivalent” S.1.38.1 adequate opportunity for prior consultations (SG 12.3) and S.1.38.1 safeguard measures, notification and consultation (SG 12) adequate opportunity for prior consultations (SG 12.3) S.1.42.1 level of concessions (SG 8.1) and S.1.38.1 of all pertinent information (SG 12.2) S.1.41.3 “immediately” (SG 12.1, chapeau) S.1.40.0, S.1.41.3 taking of decision as critical factor (SG 12.3) S.1.40.3 timing (SG 12.1)/content (SG 12.2) distinguished S.1.41.3 standard of review (DSU 11) “objective assessment of the facts” as legal question S.7.3.11A substitution of AB’s assessment, exclusion S.7.3.11A “objective assessment of matter before it”, in-depth review of explanation, need for S.7.4.1 burden of proof B.3.1.1-2 defences and exceptions B.3.3.2 GATT XX B.3.3.2 SCM 3.1(a) (Annex I (Illustrative List of Export Subsidies))/SCM 27 (developing countries) B.3.3.2 onus probandi actori incumbit as general principle of evidence B.3.1.1-2 defences/exceptions and B.3.3.2 presumption of consistency of measures taken to comply with WTO obligations, as general principle of evidence B.3.1.1 prima facie case B.3.2.1 standard of proof B.3.2.1 reversal in case of establishment of prima facie case B.3.1.1, B.3.1.2 competence (AB), upholding, modification or reversal of legal findings and conclusions (DSU 17.13) S.3.1.2 interpretation of covered agreements, means, context, treaty/treaties as a whole T.7.1.1 judicial economy C.3.2.1, J.1.1-3 Textiles and Clothing Agreement (ATC), transitional safeguards (ATC 6), as balance of rights and obligations T.7.1.1
|
|
  |
contact us : World Trade Organization, rue de Lausanne 154, CH-1211 Geneva 21, Switzerland
