> Disputes in the WTO
> Find disputes cases
> Find disputes documents
> Disputes chronologically
> Disputes by subject
> Disputes by country
This summary has been prepared by the WTO Secretariat’s Information and
Media Relations Division to help public understanding about developments
in WTO disputes. It is not a legal interpretation of the issues, and it is
not intended as a complete account of the issues. These can be found in
the reports themselves and in the minutes of the Dispute Settlement
reports: Surveillance of implementation of recommendations adopted by the
European Communities — Regime for the importation, sale and
distribution of bananas
EC presented its final status report. The EC said that on 19 December 2001
the EC Council had adopted a new regulation amending its banana regime.
The new regulation transfers as of 1 January 2002 100.000 tons of bananas
from tariff quota C (reserved for ACP imports) to tariff quota B (open to
central American countries). The EC said it had thus implemented phase II
of its agreement with the United States and Ecuador. Ecuador,
Honduras and the US welcomed the adoption of the EC regulation.
DS160: United States — Section 110(5) of the US
US said that it was engaged in discussions with the EC in an effort to
find a positive and mutually acceptable solution. The EC expressed concern
about the US' lack of progress on compliance. Australia reiterated its
concern about the apparent discriminatory nature of the proposed
compensation arrangements that had been agreed between the EC and the US.
DS136 - DS162: United States — Anti-dumping Act of 1916: United States
— Anti-dumping Act of 1916
US said that a law to repeal the 1916 Act had been introduced in Congress.
The US said it would continue to work with the EC and Japan in an effort
to reach a mutually satisfactory solution. The EC said that compliance in
this case could only be achieved once the law was effectively repealed and
pending cases terminated. Japan urged the US to promptly complete its
of report Back
United States — Section 211 Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1998
The DSB adopted the Appellate Body Report and the Panel Report, as
modified by the Appellate Body report. The EC welcomed the Appellate
Body's confirmation that Section 211 was incompatible with the TRIPS
Agreement and was found to be in breach of both most-favoured-nation and
national treatment obligations. The EC said that this decision was
satisfactory from a systemic point of view as it confirmed that trade
names fell into the discipline of the TRIPS Agreement. The US welcomed the
Appellate Body's confirmation that the TRIPS Agreement did not prevent
from establishing ownership criteria for trademarks and trade names that
excluded those claiming ownership through a confiscation.
The next regular meeting of the DSB will take place on 8 March 2002.
READ THIS FIRST
Clicking the links to the left will launch a search for all
documents on those cases in the Documents Online database. Documents
Online runs in its own browser window, which you can close to
return to the main site. Please
allow a moment for the lists to appear in the new window.
help for downloading