This summary has been prepared by the Secretariat under its own responsibility. The summary is for general information only and is not intended to affect the rights and obligations of Members.
> One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
> The basics: how disputes are settled in WTO
> Computer based training on dispute settlement
> Text of the Dispute Settlement Understanding
Current status back to top
Key facts back to top
Summary of the dispute to date back to top
The summary below was up-to-date at
See also: One-page summary of key findings of this dispute
Complaint by Mexico.
On 15 October 1996, Mexico requested consultations with
Guatemala in respect of an anti-dumping investigation commenced by
Guatemala with regard to imports of portland cement from Mexico. Mexico
alleged that this investigation was in violation of Guatemala’s
obligations under Articles 2, 3, 5 and 7.1 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement.
On 4 February 1997, Mexico requested the establishment
of a panel. At its meeting on 25 February 1997, the DSB deferred the
establishment of a panel.
Panel and Appellate Body proceedings
Further to a second request to establish a panel
by Mexico, the DSB established a panel at its meeting on 20 March 1997.
The US, Canada, Honduras and El Salvador reserved their third-party
rights. On 21 April 1997, Mexico requested the Director-General to
determine the composition of the Panel. On 1 May 1997, the Panel was
composed. The report of the Panel was circulated to Members on 19 June
1998. The Panel found that Guatemala had failed to comply with the
requirements of Article 5.3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement by initiating
the investigation on the basis of evidence of dumping, injury and casual
link that was not “sufficient” as a justification for
On 4 August 1998, Guatemala notified its intention to
appeal certain issues of law and legal interpretations developed by the
Panel. The report of the Appellate Body was circulated to Members on 2
November 1998. The Appellate Body reversed the Panel’s finding that the
dispute was properly before the Panel, on the grounds that Mexico did not
comply with Article 6.2 of the DSU in its request for a panel since it did
not identify the measure it was complaining against. Having found that the
dispute was not properly before the Panel, the Appellate Body could not
make any conclusions on the findings by the Panel on the substantive
issues that were also the subject of the appeal. The Appellate Body
stressed that its decision was without prejudice to Mexico’s right to
pursue new dispute settlement proceedings on this matter.
At the DSB meeting on 25 November 1998, the DSB adopted the Appellate
Body Report and the Panel Report, as reversed by the Appellate Body
> Problems viewing this page?
Please contact email@example.com giving details of the operating system and web browser you are using.