SUBJECT INDEX BY CASE: APPELLATE BODY REPORTS

E-F

 

Index:  A  B  C-D  E-F  G-H  I  J  K-L  M-S  T  U-Z 


ON THIS PAGE:

EC — Asbestos
EC — Bananas III
EC — Bananas III (Article 21.5 — Ecuador II) / EC — Bananas III (Article 21.5 — US)
EC — Bed Linen
EC — Bed Linen (Article 21.5 — India)
EC — Chicken Cuts
EC — Computer Equipment
EC — Export Subsidies on Sugar
EC — Export Subsidies on Sugar
EC — Hormones
EC — Poultry
EC — Sardines
EC — Selected Customs Matters
EC — Tariff Preferences
EC — Tube or Pipe Fittings


EC — Asbestos (WT/DS135/AB/R)     back to top

amicus curiae briefs

Additional Procedure (EC — Asbestos) A.2.3, W.2.2.1, W.2.6.6

adoption under AB/WP 16(1) A.2.3.1-5, W.2.6.6

failure to comply with Additional Procedure as ground for rejection A.2.3.4-5

request for views A.2.3.1, W.2.6.6

text A.2.3.3

competence (AB) (DSU 17.6)

completion of legal analysis C.4.11-12

factual basis

contentiousness/omission/insufficiency of facts C.4.11-12

insufficient argument of novel issue C.4.12

issues of law / legal interpretations C.4.12

due process (dispute settlement proceedings), fair and orderly conduct of proceedings and A.2.3.1

evidence (GATT XX: justification), scientific sources representing divergent opinion G.3.3.1

expert evidence/experts, divergence of views, relevance G.3.3.1

General Exceptions (GATT XX)

measures necessary to protect human, animal or plant life or health (GATT XX(b))

GATT III:4 (national treatment, regulatory discrimination) and G.3.2, N.1.12.1

justification

evidence of health risks, relevance G.3.2.1, N.1.12.1

good faith reliance on G.3.3.1

“preponderant” evidence G.3.3.1

scientific sources representing divergent opinion G.3.3.1

measures relating to the conservation of exhaustible natural resources (GATT XX(g)), GATT III:4 (national treatment, regulatory discrimination) and G.3.2.1

good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VCLT 26)), scientific evidence, reliance on G.3.3.1

interpretation of covered agreements

applicable law, customary rules of interpretation of public international law [as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969)], defences and exceptions, GATT XX G.3.2.1, N.1.12.1

context (VCLT 31(2)), GATT III:1/GATT III as a whole N.1.1.4

dictionaries N.1.9.1.2

effectiveness principle (ut res magis valeat quam pereat / effet utile) G.3.2.1, N.1.12.1

multiple authentic languages N.1.9.1.2

multiple authentic languages (VCLT 33) N.1.9.1.2

object and purpose N.1.9.2.3

ordinary meaning, “characteristics” T.4.1.1

same or closely related phrases in different agreements N.1.3.1.4, N.1.9.1.1

judicial economy N.1.11.7

“like product” (GATT III:2)

directly competitive or substitutable products distinguished (Ad Note) N.1.3.1.4

GATT III:4 distinguished N.1.3.1.4, N.1.9.1.1

“like product” (GATT III:4)

competitive relationship, need for N.1.9.3.2, N.1.9.4.4, N.1.9.5.1

evidence of health risks, relevance G.3.2.1, N.1.9.5.2, N.1.12.1

criteria N.1.9.4.1-8

consumer preferences N.1.9.1.2, N.1.9.4.1, N.1.9.4.4, N.1.9.4.7, N.1.9.5.2

end-uses N.1.9.4.1-8

interchangeability N.1.9.4.4, N.1.9.4.6

physical properties N.1.9.4.1-4

tariff classification N.1.9.4.1

determination

on basis of all the available evidence N.1.9.4.1-2

on case-by-case basis N.1.9.1.2

GATT III:2 distinguished N.1.3.1.4, N.1.9.1.1

“similar” / “produits similaires” / “productos similaresN.1.9.1.2

national treatment, general principle (GATT III:1)

interpretation of GATT III as a whole and

GATT III:1 as context N.1.9.2.1-3

GATT III:4 (“like” product) and N.1.1.4, N.1.9.2.1-3

“so as to afford protection” N.1.1.4

equality of competitive conditions N.1.9.2.3

“less favourable treatment” and N.1.11.7

national treatment, regulatory discrimination (GATT III:4)

GATT XX and G.3.2, G.3.2.1, N.1.12.1

general principle (GATT III:1) and N.1.1.4, N.1.9.2.1-3

“less favourable treatment” N.1.11.7

“so as to afford protection”, equality of competitive conditions N.1.9.2.3

tax discrimination (GATT III:2) provisions distinguished N.1.3.1.4, N.1.9.1.1, N.1.9.2.1-2, N.1.9.3.1

necessity test (GATT XX(b))

availability of alternative WTO-consistent measure and G.3.4.1

contribution to realization of end pursued and (objective-pursued test) G.3.4.1

non-violation claims (GATT XXIII:1(b))

any measure” N.2.2.1

as exceptional remedy N.2.1.1

measure in “conflict” with GATT provisions, applicability to N.2.2.1

concurrent application to measures falling under other provisions of GATT N.2.2.1

standard of review (panels) (DSU 11)

evidence, alleged disregard or distortion by panel (“objective assessment of the facts”)

discretion in assessment of evidence E.3.2.3

discretion/independence in evaluation of evidence S.7.3.12A

TBT Agreement

“technical regulation” (Annex 1.1) T.4.1.1-5

identifiability requirement T.4.1.4-5

third party rights W.2.9.2

AB proceedings (DSU 17.4/WP 24) W.2.9.2

passive participation in oral hearings W.2.9.2

Working Procedures (appellate review) (DSU 17.9)

concurring opinion (WP 3(2)) W.2.3.1-3

working schedule (WP 26), extension of deadline for circulation of AB report, exceptional workload W.2.10.2.3

 
EC — Bananas III (WT/DS27/AB/R)     back to top

administrative instruments, right to challenge P.5.3.1.1

Agreement on Agriculture (AG)

GATT 1994 and (AG 21.1) A.1.37.1-2

dispute settlement and A.1.37.2

market access concessions and commitments (AG 4.1) and A.1.8.2, A.1.37.2

primacy of AG A.1.37.1

Modalities Paper and A.1.37.2, A.1.37A.1

object and purpose, agricultural reform A.1.8.1

appellate review (DSU 17), legal issues and interpretations, limitation to (DSU 17.6) P.3.4.2

competence (AB) (DSU 17.6)

classification as issue of law or fact

de facto discrimination S.3.3.2

market shares S.3.3.2

nationality of majority of operators S.3.3.2

ownership, control and nationality of company S.3.3.2

procedural and administrative requirements, differences S.3.3.2

issues of law / legal interpretations, legal representation in government delegation, importance P.4.2

compliance, request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2) R.2.1.2, T.6.1.3

consultations (DSU 4), due process, disclosure obligation T.6.1.3

DSU, applicability (DSU 1.1), market access concessions and commitments (AG 4.1) / GATT 1994, consistency A.1.37.2

GATS, applicability (GATS I) G.1.1.1-2

GATT 1994, overlap G.1.1.2, G.2.2.2

“measures affecting trade in services” (GATS I:1) G.1.1.1

“affecting” (GATS I:) G.1.1.1

“production, distribution, marketing, sale and delivery of a service” G.1.1.1

services in any sector except services supplied in the exercise of government authority (GATS I:3(b)) G.1.1.1

interpretation of covered agreements

absence of provision, relevance A.1.37.2

legitimate expectations, relevance N.3.1

Lomé Convention L.3.1

narrow/broad interpretation, waivers W.1.3

ordinary meaning G.1.1.1

preamble of agreement under consideration L.2.1-2

preparatory work (VCLT 32), Agreement on Agriculture (AG) / Modalities Paper A.1.37.2, A.1.37A.1

same or closely related phrases in different agreements G.1.1.1, L.2.4, M.2.2.1

same or closely related phrases in same agreement A.1.8.2

title L.2.1-2

legal basis of claim (DSU 6.2) (request for establishment of panel) R.2.2.1-4

arguments distinguished C.1.2-4, R.2.2.1-4, W.3.1

rectification at subsequent stages, arguments in written or other submission or statement C.1.3-4, R.2.2.3, T.6.2.2-3, W.3.1

summary, sufficiency, listing of articles of agreement allegedly breached T.6.2.1

legal representation in government delegation, importance P.4.2

Licensing Agreement L.2.1-2, L.2.4

as lex specialis L.2.4

licensing procedures, limitation to (LA, title, preamble and Art. 1.1) L.2.1-2

“neutral in application and administered in a fair and equitable manner” (LA 1.3) / “administer in a uniform, impartial and reasonable manner” (GATT X:3(a)), equivalence L.2.4, P.5.3.1.1, T.2.4

Lomé Convention, panel’s right to refer to L.3.1

market access concessions and commitments (AG 4.1)

consistency with GATT XIII A.1.8.2, A.1.37.2, A.1.38.9

dispute settlement A.1.37.2

fundamental nature A.1.8.1

“matter referred to the DSB” (AD 17.4/DSU 7.1), terms of reference (DSU 7) as determining factor C.1.4, R.2.2.3, T.6.2.3

MFN treatment (GATS II) M.2.2.1-2

determination of violation, requirements, aims and effects test, GATT III:1 distinguished M.2.2.2

“treatment no less favourable” (GATS II:1) M.2.2.1

de facto discrimination M.2.2.1

GATS XVII (national treatment) distinguished M.2.2.1

MFN treatment (GATT I) M.2.1.1

“advantage” (GATT I:1) M.2.1.1

de facto discrimination M.2.1.1

as finding of fact S.3.3.2

national treatment, general principle (GATT III:1)

“so as to afford protection”

equality of competitive conditions, protection of competitive relationship N.3.1

GATS II and XVII distinguished N.1.13.1

omission from GATT III:2, first sentence, relevance N.1.11.2

national treatment, regulatory discrimination (GATT III:4)

“affecting” G.1.1.1, N.1.10.1

“less favourable treatment” N.1.11.1-2

national treatment, services and service suppliers (GATS XVII), determination of violation, requirements, aims and effects test, GATT III:1 distinguished M.2.2.2, N.1.13.1

national treatment, tax discrimination (GATT III:2)

“not similarly taxed”, threshold/de minimis differential N.3.1

“so as to afford protection” N.1.11.2

intention, relevance M.2.2.2, N.1.13.1

“neutral in application and administered in a fair and equitable manner” (LA 1.3) / “administer in a uniform, impartial and reasonable manner” (GATT X:3(a)), equivalence L.2.4

non-discriminatory administration of quantitative restrictions (GATT XIII) T.2.1-4

allocation to Members not having a substantial interest (GATT XIII:1) T.2.1

distribution of trade as close as possible to expected shares in absence of restrictions as aim (GATT XIII:2, chapeau) T.2.2

regulatory regimes established by Member, relevance T.2.3

non-retroactivity of treaties (VCLT 28) P.3.4.2

continuing measures P.3.4.2

as general principle of international law P.3.4.2

non-violation claims (GATT XXIII:1(b)), de minimis effects, relevance N.3.1

notice of appeal, requirements (AB/WP 20(2)), statement of allegations of errors on issues of law / legal interpretations (AB/WP 20(2)(d)) W.2.7.3.1

private counsel, participation in DSU proceedings P.4.1-2

publication and administration of trade regulations (GATT X) P.5.3.1.1, T.2.4

uniform, impartial and reasonable administration (GATT X:3(a)) P.5.3.1.1, T.2.4

request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2)

compliance, importance of parties’ responsibility R.2.1.2, T.6.1.3

scrutiny by DSB R.2.1.2

fruitfulness of action, determination by Member R.5.2

Schedules of Concessions (GATT II)

diminishment of obligations, exclusion T.1.3.1

as integral part of GATT 1994 (WTO II:2) T.1.3.1

standing/right to bring claim (DSU 3.7)

enforcement of WTO rules as justification R.5.3

fruitfulness of resort to dispute settlement procedures R.5.2

legal interest, relevance R.5.1

self-regulating nature of provision R.5.2

terms of reference of panels (DSU 7), request for establishment of panel as basis R.2.1.2, T.6.1.3

waivers

exceptional nature W.1.3

GATT I/GATT XIII waivers, relationship W.1.1

Lomé waiver L.3.1, W.1.1-3

Working Procedures (appellate review) (DSU 17.9)

composition of delegation

legal representation, importance P.4.2

Member’s right to determine W.2.6.1

oral hearing (WP 27), change of date W.2.11.1.1

working schedule (WP 26)

modification in exceptional circumstances at request of parties, participants or third participants (WP 16(2)) W.2.10.1.1

oral hearing W.2.11.1.1

Working Procedures (panel) (DSU 12.1 and Appendix 3), preliminary rulings, desirability W.3.1

 
EC — Bananas III (Article 21.5 — Ecuador II) / EC — Bananas III (Article 21.5 — US) (WT/DS27/AB/RW2/ECU, WT/DS27/AB/RW/USA)     back to top

competence (AB) (DSU 17.6), compétence de la compétence W.2.11.3.3-4

competence (panels)

amendment or expiry of “specific measure” during proceedings T.6.3.17

limitation on, need for express provision T.6.3.17

confidentiality of proceedings (DSU 17.10/DSU 18.2)

AB’s right to lift DSU 17.10 confidentiality requirement W.2.11.3.3

open oral hearing (WP 27) and W.2.11.3.3-4

estoppel, good faith engagement in dispute settlement procedures (DSU 3.10) and P.3.1.19, P.3.7.3

evidence, acceptability/value as, conflicting statements where text is clear E.3.2.35

implementation of DSB recommendations and rulings (DSU 21)

choice of means at Member’s discretion R.4.1.33

notification of intentions R.4.1.33

implementation of panel/AB recommendations, right of panel/AB to make suggestions for (DSU 19.1)

discretionary nature of right I.0.9

compliance with suggestion, relevance I.0.9

legal status / binding effect of suggestions I.0.9

expired measure T.6.3.17

interpretation of covered agreements

Agreement on Agriculture (AG) / Modalities Paper A.1.37A.3-4, T.1.2.13

applicable law, customary rules of interpretation of public international law [as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969)], Schedules of Concessions T.1.2.13

effectiveness principle (ut res magis valeat quam pereat / effet utile), meaning to be attributed to every word and phrase T.1.3.4

subsequent agreement between the parties regarding the interpretation or application of the treaty (VCLT 31(3)(a))

“application” I.3.9A.2

as authentic element of interpretation (ILC commentary) I.3.9A.2

interpretation by Ministerial Conference and General Council (WTO IX.2) as I.3.9A.1-2

amendment of covered agreement distinguished I.3.9A.1

waiver allowing temporary departure from WTO obligations distinguished I.3.9A.1-2, I.3.10.29, W.1.5

modification of Schedules (GATT XXVIII) T.1.5.1

multiple complainants (DSU 9)

harmonization of panels and timetables (DSU 9.3)

“harmonized” M.4.4

“to the greatest extent possible” M.4.4

mutually agreed solutions M.6.1, R.5.9

temporary suspension of concessions (DSU 22.8) and M.6.1, R.5.9

waiver of right to Article 21.5 compliance proceedings, whether M.6.1, R.5.9

non-discriminatory administration of quantitative restrictions (GATT XIII)

allocation to Members having a substantial interest (GATT XIII:2(d)) T.2.9

distribution of trade as close as possible to expected shares in absence of restrictions as aim (GATT XIII:2, chapeau) T.2.8-9

GATT I:1 (non-discriminatory application of tariffs) distinguished T.2.9

GATT XI:1 (prohibition of restrictions) and T.2.8

GATT XI:2 (permitted prohibitions or restrictions) and T.2.8

“restriction” T.2.9

tariff quotas, applicability to (GATT XIII:5) T.2.8, T.2.9

notice of appeal, requirements (AB/WP 20(2))

right to defend interests and W.2.7.3.6

statement of allegations of errors on issues of law / legal interpretations (AB/WP 20(2)(d)) W.2.7.3.6

allegation of panel’s failure to make objective assessment (DSU 11), need for specific reference W.2.7.5.7-8

nullification or impairment (DSU 3.8) N.3.4-5

overlap of GATT I:1 and GATT XIII obligations, relevance N.3.4

nullification or impairment (DSU 3.8), presumption in case of inconsistency with covered agreement N.3.4-5

standing to bring complaint in absence of nullification or impairment N.3.5, R.5.10

review of implementation of DSB recommendations and rulings (DSU 21.5), “measures taken to comply” (including panel’s determination of WTO consistency), measures closely related to measure taken to comply R.4.1.32

Schedules of Concessions (GATT II)

diminishment of obligations, exclusion, temporal limitations, whether T.1.3.4

modification T.1.5.1

ordinary customs duties in excess of those provided for in Schedule (GATT II:1(b)), “terms, conditions or qualifications” T.1.3.4

“specific measure at issue” (AD 17.4/DSU 6.2)

expired measure, measure expiring during the proceedings T.6.3.17

identification as part of the matter referred to the DSB, need for (AD 17.4/DSU 7.1), amendment of measure during proceedings T.6.3.17

standing/right to bring claim (DSU 3.7)

fruitfulness of resort to dispute settlement procedures M.6.1, R.5.9

“solution” M.6.1, R.5.9

suspension of concessions (DSU 22)

as “available” (discretionary) measure S.9.10

mutually satisfactory solution (DSU 22.8) M.5.1

as temporary measure / termination on compliance with DSB recommendations or rulings (DSU 22.8), mutually agreed solutions (DSU 3.7) and M.6.1, R.5.9

waivers

decision granting, requirements W.1.5

exceptional nature W.1.5

purpose W.1.4

 
EC — Bed Linen (WT/DS141/AB/R)     back to top

determination of dumping (AD 2)

calculation of administrative, selling and general costs and profits (AD 2.2.2)

“weighted average” (AD 2.2.2(ii)) A.3.11.1-2

need for more than one exporter or producer A.3.11.1

sales not in the ordinary course of trade (“actual amounts incurred and realized”) A.3.11.2

calculation of margins of dumping (AD 2.4)

actual product under investigation / type or model, distinction A.3.14.1

comparison of weighted average normal value with weighted average of all comparable export transactions A.3.14.2

“like product” / “comparable” equation A.3.14.3

zeroing, negative differences and A.3.14.2

sales transaction not “in the ordinary course of trade”, weighted average (AD 2.2.2(ii)) and A.3.11.2

interpretation of covered agreements

multiple permissible interpretations A.3.60.1

benefit of doubt to challenged measure A.3.60.1

specific action against dumping (AD 18.1) or subsidy (SCM 32.1) A.3.60.1

standard/powers of review (AB) (AD 17.6), interpretation of relevant provisions of AD (AD 17.6(ii)), “admits of more than one permissible interpretation” A.3.60.1

Working Procedures (appellate review) (DSU 17.9), working schedule (WP 26), modification in exceptional circumstances at request of parties, participants or third participants (WP 16(2)) W.2.10.1.3

 
EC — Bed Linen (Article 21.5 — India) (WT/DS141/AB/RW)     back to top

determination of injury (AD 3/SCM 15)

calculation of volume of dumped imports (AD 3.1 and 3.2) A.3.7.1

calculation of “all other” anti-dumping rate (AD 9.4), relevance A.3.44.1-3

calculation of volume (AD 2.1) compared A.3.7.1

method, freedom to choose A.3.18.1-3

“positive evidence” / “objective examination” requirement (AD 3.1) A.3.7.1, A.3.18.1-3

AD 9.4, relevance A.3.44.1, A.3.44.3

AD 17.6(ii), relevance A.3.60.4

country by country analysis / cumulative assessment of volume and prices (AD 3.3), “positive evidence” / “objective examination” requirement (AD 3.1) A.3.21.1

evaluation of injury factors (AD 3.4)

evaluation of causal relationship (AD 3.5/SCM 15.5)

failure to establish prima facie case R.4.3.5

injurious effects of dumped goods and of other factors, need to distinguish (AD 3.5/SCM 15.5) A.3.24.6

non-attribution to dumped imports of injury caused by other factors (AD 3.5/SCM 15.5) A.3.24.6

“positive evidence” / “objective examination” requirement (AD 3.1)

calculation of volume of dumped imports A.3.7.1, A.3.44.1, A.3.44.2

country by country analysis / cumulative assessment of volume and prices (AD 3.3) A.3.21.1

“objective examination”

extrapolation of examined producer/exporter findings to non-examined producers/ exporters (AD 6.10) A.3.19.3-6

proportional attribution between examined and non-examined producers/exporters A.3.19.5-6

“positive”, in case of producers/exporters examined individually A.3.19.1

due process (investigation of dumping (AD 6)) A.3.29.1

evidentiary rules (AD 6/SCM 12)

applicability, AD as whole A.3.29.1

due process A.3.29.1

individual examination of all producers, alternatives in case of impracticability (AD 6.10) A.3.37.2.1

final resolution of dispute, adoption of panel or AB report by DSB (DSU 16.4, 19.2, 21 and 22) R.4.3.4-5

implementation of DSB recommendations and rulings (DSU 21), prompt compliance (DSU 21.1) R.4.3.4

imposition and collection of dumping duties (AD 9)

calculation of “all other” anti-dumping duty rate (AD 9.4)

calculation of volume of dumped imports (AD 3), relevance A.3.44.1-3

as exception to AD 9.3 A.3.44.2

prior determination of margins of dumping, injury and causal link (AD 2 and 3), need for (AD 9.1) A.3.39.1

information or technical advice, panel’s right to seek (DSU 13), panel’s rights, not to seek S.4.14

interpretation of covered agreements

applicable law, customary rules of interpretation of public international law [as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969)], AD 17.6(ii) A.3.60.4

grammar, respect for A.3.39.1

multiple authentic languages (VCLT 33) I.3.11.2

presumption of same meaning (VCLT 33(3)) I.3.11.2

multiple permissible interpretations A.3.58.5, A.3.60.4

panel reports

adoption by DSB (DSU 16.4)

as final resolution of dispute R.4.3.4

unappealed panel finding and R.4.3.4-6

review of implementation of DSB recommendations and rulings (DSU 21.5) R.4.1.3-4

finality of panel/AB report and R.4.3.4-5

unappealed panel reports and R.4.3.4-5

complainant’s failure to establish prima facie case of WTO-inconsistent measure, relevance R.4.3.5, R.4.3.14

“matter referred”

legal basis of claim / consistency of measure R.4.1.3-4

measure taken to comply, existence R.4.1.3-4

“measures taken to comply” (including panel’s determination of WTO consistency) R.4.1.3-4

as new claim / reassertion of old R.4.2.3-4, R.4.3.6

specific action against dumping (AD 18.1) or subsidy (SCM 32.1) A.3.60.4

standard of review (panels) (DSU 11)

evidence, alleged disregard or distortion by panel (“objective assessment of the facts”)

discretion/independence in evaluation of evidence S.7.3.16-17

egregious error, need for S.7.3.16

standard/powers of review (AB) (AD 17.6)

assessment of the facts (AD 17.6(i))A.3.59.8-9

substitution of panel’s own assessment, exclusion A.3.58.5

“unbiased and objective” A.3.58.5

authorities’ establishment of facts (AD 17.6(i)), “proper” A.3.58.5

discretionary powers A.3.59.9

“facts made available” (AD 17.5(ii)), requirement to seek information, whether A.3.59.8

interpretation of relevant provisions of AD (AD 17.6(ii))

in accordance with customary rules of interpretation of public international law A.3.60.4

“admits of more than one permissible interpretation” A.3.58.5, A.3.60.4

objective assessment, relevance A.3.60.4

 
EC — Chicken Cuts (WT/DS269/AB/R, WT/DS269/AB/R/Corr.1, WT/DS286/AB/R, WT/DS286/AB/R/Corr.1)     back to top

Harmonized System of Customs Classification

as aid to interpretation of covered agreements H.1.3-4, I.3.3.6-7, T.1.2.9

Chapter Notes

binding effect H.1.5

Explanatory Notes distinguished H.1.5

“objective characteristics” as basis for classification, “preservation”, whether H.1.6-7

WTO agreements, relationship with H.1.3-4, I.3.3.6, T.1.2.9

interpretation of covered agreements

circumstances of conclusion of treaty (VCLT 32)

constructive knowledge of event, act or instrument I.3.10.22

EC customs classification practice, whether I.3.10.24-5

relevance vs. direct link / direct influence requirement I.3.10.19-20

temporal correlation between “circumstance” and conclusion of treaty I.3.10.21

context (VCLT 31(2))

any agreement made between the parties (VCLT 31(2)(a)) or accepted by parties (VCLT 31(2)(b)), Harmonized System of Customs Classification H.1.3-4

instrument made by one or more parties in connection with the conclusion of the treaty (VCLT 31(2)(b)), EC implementing regulation I.3.10.27

interpretation of covered agreements, dictionaries A.1.2.12

object and purpose, consistency with object and purpose of treaty as a whole I.3.6.2

ordinary meaning I.3.2.12

parties’ intentions (VCLT 31(1))

common intention I.3.6.2, T.1.2.10

Members’ Schedules, whether I.3.9.8

as rule of customary international law A.1.2.12

supplementary means (VCLT 32) as aid I.3.10.18-19

preparatory work (VCLT 32), EC customs classification practice I.3.10.23-4

subsequent practice which establishes parties’ agreement on interpretation (VCLT 31(3)(b))

common practice, need for I.3.9.7-11, T.1.2.10-11

EC customs classification practice, whether I.3.10.24-5

supplementary means (VCLT 32)

common intention of parties, as aid in establishing I.3.10.19

decisions of municipal courts I.3.10.26

“recourse may be had” I.3.10.18-19

prompt and satisfactory resolution of disputes, Members’ right to (DSU 3), recommendations and rulings of DSB (DSU 3.4) R.2.3.20

request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2), compliance, importance of, satisfactory settlement / positive solution obligations (DSU 3.4/DSU 3.7) and R.2.3.20

Schedules of Concessions (GATT II)

as integral part of GATT 1994 (WTO II:2) I.3.9.8

interpretation and clarification, circumstances of conclusion (VCLT 32) C.9.10.18-27, T.1.2.10

“specific measure at issue” (AD 17.4/DSU 6.2)

identification as part of the matter referred to the DSB, need for (AD 17.4/DSU 7.1) R.2.3.18-21

amendment of measure during proceedings R.2.3.18, T.6.3.16

identification of product, need for R.2.3.21

measure subsequent to establishment of panel having the “same effect” R.2.3.18-20

standing/right to bring claim (DSU 3.7), positive solution as aim R.2.3.20

 
EC — Computer Equipment (WT/DS62/AB/R, WT/DS67/AB/R, WT/DS68/AB/R)     back to top

due process (dispute settlement proceedings), prejudice to party, relevance D.2.2.7, R.2.3.7

Harmonized System of Customs Classification, as aid to interpretation of covered agreements H.1.2

interpretation of covered agreements

applicable law, Schedules of Concessions I.3.5.4-5, T.1.2.1

circumstances of conclusion of treaty (VCLT 32) I.3.10.3

Harmonized System of Customs Classification H.1.2, T.1.2.2

legitimate expectations, relevance I.3.5.4-5

specific language, need for I.3.5.4

tariff concessions in Member’s schedule and I.3.5.4, T.1.2.1, T.1.2.6

unilateral nature of I.3.5.4, T.1.2.1

object and purpose R.2.3.6, T.1.2.1

parties’ intentions (VCLT 31(1)), common intention I.3.5.4, I.3.10.4, T.1.2.1

preparatory work (VCLT 32), EC customs classification practice I.3.10.3-4, T.1.2.3-5

supplementary means (VCLT 32) I.3.10.2-4, I.3.10.18-27

in case of ambiguity (VCLT 32(a)) I.3.10.2

text/plain language, legitimate expectations and I.3.5.4

World Customs Organization decisions T.1.2.2

“measure”, DSU 6.2, application of tariffs as R.2.3.4

Schedules of Concessions (GATT II) T.1.2.1-2

as integral part of GATT 1994 (WTO II:2) I.3.5.4-5, T.1.2.1-2

interpretation and clarification T.1.2

applicable law I.3.5.4-5, T.1.2.1

circumstances of conclusion (VCLT 32) T.1.2.3

verification of tariff schedules T.1.2.7

World Customs Organization decisions and T.1.2.2

“specific measure at issue” (AD 17.4/DSU 6.2)

identification as part of the matter referred to the DSB, need for (AD 17.4/DSU 7.1) R.2.3.4-7

due process right to defend oneself and D.2.2.7

identification of product, need for R.2.3.5-6

objective and purpose of DSU 6.2 as test R.2.3.6

World Customs Organization (WCO), decisions as aid to interpretation of Schedules of Tariff Concessions T.1.2.2

 
EC — Export Subsidies on Sugar (WT/DS265/33, WT/DS266/33, WT/DS283/14)     back to top

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)], Schedules of Concessions T.1.2.12

Schedules of Concessions (GATT II), as integral part of GATT 1994 (WTO II:2) A.1.4A.1, T.1.2.12

 
EC — Export Subsidies on Sugar (WT/DS265/AB/R, WT/DS266/AB/R, WT/DS283/AB/R)     back to top

Agreement on Agriculture (AG)

export competition commitments (AG 8), compliance with both AG and Schedule of Commitments, need for A.1.14B.1-2, T.1.4.1

GATT 1994 and (AG 21.1) A.1.37.3-4, A.1.38.15, S.2.19.4

primacy of AG A.1.37.4, T.1.4.1

interpretation

same or closely related phrases in same agreement A.1.5A.1

text/plain language A.1.14B.1, A.1.17.3

Modalities Paper and A.1.37A.2

object and purpose, substantial progressive reductions in agricultural support and protection A.1.5A.3-4

Schedules of Commitments (AG 3)

conformity with AG, need for A.1.14B.1-2, T.1.4.1

as integral part of GATT 1994 (AG 3.1) A.1.4A.1, A.1.37.4

primacy of AG (AG 21) A.1.6.3-4, T.1.4.1

burden of proof

reversal in respect of circumvention of export subsidy commitments (AG 10.3)

DSU 6.2 requirements distinguished A.1.34A.1

SCM claims, applicability to A.1.38.1.15

reversal in respect of presumption of nullification or impairment (DSU 3.8) N.3.2-3

competence (AB) (DSU 17.6)

completion of legal analysis

competence (AB) (DSU 17.6), in absence of full argumentation of legal issues A.1.38.15, C.4.27

factual basis

insufficiency A.1.38.15, C.4.27, S.2.19.5

limitation to panel’s findings or undisputed facts in panel record C.4.27

issues of law / legal interpretations

issues not examined by panel C.4.27

new arguments S.3.1.7

domestic support commitments (AG 6)

domestic support / export subsidy regimes, need to maintain distinction (AG 3) A.1.36.2

spill-over effect of permitted domestic support A.1.36.2

footnotes, status A.1.37.4

due process (dispute settlement proceedings), full argumentation of issues, need for A.1.38.15, C.4.27

estoppel

good faith engagement in dispute settlement procedures (DSU 3.10) and P.3.1.16, P.3.7.1-2

relevance in WTO dispute settlement P.3.7.1-2

“export subsidy” (AG 1(e)) A.1.14C.1

export subsidy commitments (AG 9)

“export subsidy commitments” (AG 3.1) A.1.4A.1

“commitments limiting subsidization” A.1.4B

levels (AG 9.2), “budgetary outlays … and the quantities benefiting from such subsidies”, as linked requirements (AG 9.2(b)(iv)) A.1.5A.1, A.1.14D.1, A.1.29A.1

“reduction commitments”

budgetary outlay commitments (AG 9.2(a)(i)) A.1.14D.1

quantity commitments (AG 9.2(a)(ii)) A.1.14D.1

“subject to reduction commitments”, applicability to AG 9.1 subsidies A.1.14D.1

export subsidy, prohibition (AG 3.3)

in excess of budgetary outlay and quantity commitment level (AG 3.3) A.1.4B.1

budgetary outlay and quantity commitment levels A.1.5A.1-4

“commitments limiting subsidization” (AG 3.1) and A.1.4B

good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VCLT 26)), dispute settlement procedures, engagement in (DSU 3.10), estoppel and P.3.1.16

implementation of panel/AB recommendations, right of panel/AB to make suggestions for (DSU 19.1), discretionary right of panel or AB to make suggestions I.0.2

interpretation of covered agreements

applicable law

customary rules of interpretation of public international law [as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969)] A.1.4A.1, T.1.2.12

Schedules of Concessions A.1.4A.1

object and purpose, preamble as evidence of A.1.5A.2

same or closely related phrases in same agreement A.1.5A.1

text/plain language A.1.14B.1, A.1.17.3

judicial economy, “positive solution to dispute” requirement and J.1.21, S.2.19.4, S.7.7.2

notice of appeal, requirements (AB/WP 20(2)), statement of allegations of errors on issues of law / legal interpretations (AB/WP 20(2)(d)), summary of contested conclusion and related findings and interpretations W.2.7.3.4

nullification or impairment (DSU 3.8)

adverse impact as N.3.2-3

presumption in case of inconsistency with covered agreement N.3.2-3

payments on export of agricultural product financed by virtue of governmental action (AG 9.1(c))

average total cost of production benchmark A.1.20.12-13

benchmark/standard (AG 9.1(c)), independent enquiry into existence of benefit, relevance A.1.3.4

“by virtue of”

government control, relevance A.1.26.10

nexus, need for A.1.26.9

regulatory framework, relevance A.1.26.10

cost of production, failure to recoup as A.1.20.11-13

cross-subsidization and A.1.20.13, A.1.28.2-3

“financed”, “whether or not a charge on the public account” A.1.27.7

“governmental action”, determination on case-by-case basis A.1.26.11

“on the export” A.1.28.3

“payments”

transfer of economic resources, need for A.1.17.3

distinct entities, relevance A.1.17.3, A.1.28.2

payments by private parties as A.1.26.9, A.1.27.7

request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2), reversal of burden of proof (AG 10.3) and A.1.34A.1

Schedules of Concessions (GATT II)

interpretation and clarification

applicable law A.1.4A.1

footnotes, status A.1.37.4, T.1.4.1

SCM Agreement, dispute settlement (SCM 30), special or additional rules and procedures (DSU 1.2 and Appendix 2), SCM 4.7 (recommendation for withdrawal of subsidy) J.1.21, S.2.19.4, S.7.7.2

standard of review (panels) (DSU 11)

“objective assessment of matter before it”

error of law, failure to make recommendation to resolve dispute J.1.20-1, S.2.19.4, S.7.7.2

obligation to rule on parties’ SCM 3 claims J.1.21, S.2.19.4-5, S.7.7.2

“such other findings as will assist the DSB” (DSU 7.1/DSU 11) J.1.20-1, S.7.7.1-2

judicial economy and J.1.20-1, S.2.19.4, S.7.7.2

recommendation for DSB recommendation or ruling J.1.20-1, S.2.19.4, S.7.7.2

standing/right to bring claim (DSU 3.7), fruitfulness of resort to dispute settlement procedures P.3.7.2

subsidies, prohibited (SCM, Part II), “contingent upon export performance” (SCM 3.1(a)), measure falling within AG 9 A.1.3.4, A.1.14C.1, A.1.17.4

“withdrawal of subsidy without delay” (SCM 4.7), time-limits, insufficiency of facts in panel report for AB to specify A.1.38.15, C.4.27, S.2.19.5

Working Procedures (appellate review) (DSU 17.9), withdrawal of appeal (AB/WP 30), timing W.2.0.2

 
EC — Hormones (WT/DS26/AB/R, WT/DS48/AB/R)     back to top

burden of proof B.3.1.3

defences and exceptions B.3.3.3

measures which result in a higher level of protection than international standards (SPS 3.3) B.3.3.3

onus probandi actori incumbit as general principle of evidence B.3.1.3

defences/exceptions and B.3.3.3

prima facie case B.3.2.2

panel ruling in favour of party presenting case, need for B.3.2.2

procedures, modification W.3.3

SPS measures B.3.3.3, S.6.6.3

competence (AB) (DSU 17.6)

classification as issue of law or fact

compliance/consistency with treaty obligations S.3.3.3, S.7.3.1

credibility and weight of evidence S.3.3.3, S.7.3.1

completion of legal analysis C.4.3-4

in case of disagreement with panel C.4.3-4

factual basis, contentiousness/omission/insufficiency of facts C.4.3-4

issues of law / legal interpretations

alleged failure of panel to make objective assessment (DSU 11) S.3.2.1

issues not raised by parties C.4.3

competence (panels), objections, requirements, specificity/explicitness O.1.1

competence of panels and AB (DSU 3.2/DSU 11), right to develop own legal reasoning including arguments not adduced by parties (jura novit curia) C.2.1

due process (dispute settlement proceedings), panel’s discretion on matters of procedure (DSU 12.1 and Appendix 3) D.2.2.2-3, O.1.1

expert evidence/experts

divergence of views, relevance S.6.14.4

multiple complainants and (DSU 9.2) M.4.1-2

harmonization of measures (SPS 3)

burden of proof, SPS measures S.6.7.1-2

general rule/exception relationship (SPS 3.1 and 3.2), whether S.6.8.1-3

interpretation of covered agreements

footnotes to treaty S.6.8.4

preamble of agreement under consideration S.6.8.2

measures based on international standards (SPS 3.1) S.6.6.1-3

“based on” S.6.6.1

burden of proof S.6.6.3

measures which conform to international standards (SPS 3.2) S.6.7.1-3

burden of proof S.6.7.1-3

incorporation into municipal law S.6.7.2

presumption of consistency S.6.6.1, S.6.6.3, S.6.7.2

measures which result in a higher level of protection (SPS 3.3) S.6.8.1-5

consistency with other SPS articles including SPS 5.1-8 S.6.8.4

Members’ right to choose S.6.5.1

risk assessment, need for (SPS 3.3, footnote 2 and SPS 5.1) S.6.8.4

scientific justification, need for S.6.8.4

SPS preamble and S.6.8.2

municipal law, incorporation of international SPS standard S.6.7.2

information or technical advice, panel’s right to seek (DSU 13)

expert evidence/experts (DSU 13.2), individual advice, right to seek S.4.1-2

panel’s rights

not to seek S.7.3.3

to establish group of experts S.4.1, W.3.2

to make ad hoc rules S.4.2, W.3.2

information or technical advice, panel’s right to seek (SPS 11.2), panel’s right to establish group of experts S.4.1

interpretation of covered agreements

applicable law, customary rules of interpretation of public international law [as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969)], SPS P.3.5.1

context (VCLT 31(2)), treaty/treaties as a whole S.6.14.2, S.6.17.1, S.6.17.2

in dubio mitius principle I.3.8.1, S.6.6.2

definition I.3.8.1

as supplementary means of interpretation I.3.8.1

ordinary meaning, “potential” S.6.9.4

preamble of agreement under consideration P.3.5.1

presumption of consistency (SPS 3.2) S.6.6.1, S.6.6.3

supplementary means (VCLT 32) I.3.8.1

in dubio mitius principle and I.3.8.1

text/plain language I.3.2.2

judicial economy J.1.4

multiple complainants (DSU 9)

harmonization of panels and timetables (DSU 9.3), joint meeting with experts M.4.1-2

participation in panel proceedings by third parties (DSU 10) D.2.2.3

participation in panel proceedings initiated by another complainant M.4.3

non-retroactivity of treaties (VCLT 28), continuing measures T.5.2.1

notice of appeal, requirements (AB/WP 20(2))

statement of allegations of errors on issues of law / legal interpretations (AB/WP 20(2)(d))

allegation of panel’s failure to make objective assessment (DSU 11), need for specific reference S.3.2.1

legal argument in support of claim distinguished S.3.2.1

precautionary principle (general)

customary international environmental law and S.6.23.1

customary international law and P.3.5.1, S.6.23.1

precautionary principle (SPS 5.7)

consistency of measures with SPS agreement, need for S.6.23.1

measures which result in a higher level of protection than international standards (SPS 3.3) P.3.5.1

provisional application of SPS measures (SPS 5.7) and P.3.5.1, S.6.23.1

SPS preamble P.3.5.1

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

ascertainable/theoretical risk distinguished (SPS 5.1) S.6.10.1-2

quantitative threshold, relevance S.6.14.1

assessment prepared other than by Member concerned, acceptability (SPS 5.1 and Annex A, para. 4) S.6.9.5

balance of SPS interests and (SPS 5.1) S.6.9.1

elements (Annex A, para. 4), “potential”, “probable” distinguished S.6.9.4

measures based on, need for (SPS 5.1) S.6.14.1-2

rational relationship between measure and risk, need for S.6.14.2, S.6.14.4

risk management distinguished (SPS 5.1 and Annex A, para. 4) S.6.9.3

“scientific justification” (SPS 2.3) and S.6.8.4-5

“scientific justification” (SPS 3.3) and S.6.9.5

specificity of assessment, need for (SPS 5.1 and 5.2) S.6.13.1-2, S.6.13.7

“sufficient scientific evidence” requirement (SPS 2.2) and S.6.3.1-2, S.6.9.1-2, S.6.14.2

divergence of expert views, relevance S.6.14.4

two-step process, acceptability (Annex A, para. 4) S.6.9.4

sanitary and phytosanitary measures, appropriate level of protection (SPS 5.5-5.6)

comparability of measures, need for S.6.16.1

consistency in application (SPS 5.5) S.6.15

arbitrary or unjustifiable inconsistencies, exclusion S.6.15.1-2

discrimination or disguised restriction of trade resulting from inconsistency (SPS 2.3) S.6.15.2, S.6.17.1, S.6.17.2-3

distinctions in the level of protection in different situations S.6.16.1

comparability S.6.16.1

legal obligation, whether S.6.15.1

SPS Agreement

arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination, exclusion (SPS 2.3)

appropriate level of protection and (SPS 5.5) S.6.15.1-2, S.6.16.1

alternative sources of discrimination S.6.17.3-4

as balance between promotion of international trade and protection of human, animal or plant life or health S.6.3.1, S.6.5.2

risk assessment (SPS 5.1) and S.6.9.1

basic rights and obligations (SPS 2), underlying nature of provision S.6.2.1, S.6.3.2

interpretation

applicability to pre-existing situations and measures T.5.2.1

customary rules of interpretation of public international law [as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969)] and P.3.5.1

preamble as aid S.6.8.2

SPS Agreement, sufficient scientific evidence, need for (SPS 2.2) S.6.3.1-2

standard of review (panels) (DSU 11)

DSU 11 as applicable law, applicability to Anti-Dumping Agreement subject to AD 17.6 S.7.1.1

evidence, alleged disregard or distortion by panel (“objective assessment of the facts”) S.7.2.1

discretion in selection of relevant evidence S.7.3.4

discretion to select which evidence to refer to explicitly S.7.3.4

egregious error, need for S.7.3.2

obligation to request information S.7.3.3

“objective assessment of matter before it” S.7.2.1

applicability of and conformity with relevant covered agreements, customary international law, applicability S.7.2.1

applicable law, customary international law S.7.2.1

de novo review of the facts, exclusion S.7.2.1

standard/powers of review (AB) (AD 17.6), non-applicability to covered agreements other than Anti-Dumping Agreement such as the SCM and SPS Agreements S.7.1.1

terms of reference of panels (DSU 7), as definition of jurisdiction / legal claims at issue, legal claim included in terms of reference, limitation of jurisdiction to C.2.1

third party rights T.8.1

panel proceedings (DSU 10 and Appendix 3), panel’s discretion and, enhancement in accordance with due process D.2.2.3, T.8.1

Working Procedures (appellate review) (DSU 17.9), working schedule (WP 26), extension of deadline for circulation of AB report W.2.10.2.1

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

panel’s discretion D.2.2.2-3, O.1.1, W.3.3

burden of proof W.3.3

due process and D.2.2.2-3, O.1.1

 
EC — Poultry (WT/DS69/AB/R)     back to top

Agreement on Agriculture (AG), special safeguards (AG 5), c.i.f. import price (AG 5.1(b)) A.1.14.1, A.1.14.2

bilateral settlements, covered agreement, whether B.2.1

“c.i.f. import price” (AG 5.1(b)) A.1.14.1, A.1.14.2

competence (AB) (DSU 17.6)

issues of law / legal interpretations S.3.1.3

alleged failure of panel to make objective assessment (DSU 11) S.3.2.3

upholding, modification or reversal of legal findings and conclusions (DSU 17.13) S.3.1.3

GATT 1947, continuing relevance under WTO B.2.1

interpretation of covered agreements

circumstances of conclusion of treaty I.3.10.7

supplementary means (VCLT 32) I.3.10.7

judicial economy, panel’s discretionary power to determine, which arguments must be examined S.7.2.3

Licensing Agreement L.2.3

trade distortion in part of trade not subject to procedures L.2.3

non-discriminatory administration of quantitative restrictions (GATT XIII) T.2.5-7

allocation to Members having a substantial interest (GATT XIII:2(d)) T.2.5

compensation negotiated under GATT XXVIII and T.2.6

distribution of trade as close as possible to expected shares in absence of restrictions as aim (GATT XIII:2, chapeau) T.2.7

notice of appeal, requirements (AB/WP 20(2)), statement of allegations of errors on issues of law / legal interpretations (AB/WP 20(2)(d)), allegation of panel’s failure to make objective assessment (DSU 11), need for specific reference S.3.2.3

Oilseeds Agreement (EC-Brazil), covered agreement, whether B.2.1

publication and administration of trade regulations (GATT X)

administration and existence of law, regulation, decision or ruling distinguished P.5.1.3

laws, regulations, judicial decisions and administrative rulings of general application (GATT X:1) P.5.1.1-3

substance and fact of publication distinguished P.5.1.3

Schedules of Concessions (GATT II)

diminishment of obligations, exclusion T.1.3.2

as integral part of GATT 1994 (WTO II:2), Schedule LXXX B.2.1, T.1.3.3

Schedule LXXX

bilateral settlements B.2.1

as integral part of GATT 1994 (WTO II:2) B.2.1, T.1.3.3

standard of review (panels) (DSU 11)

“objective assessment of matter before it” S.7.2.2-3

all arguments, need to consider S.7.2.3

Working Procedures (appellate review) (DSU 17.9), written responses (WP 28) W.2.12.4

 
EC — Sardines (WT/DS231/AB/R)     back to top

amicus curiae briefs A.2.1.12

NGO/private individual briefs A.2.1.12

discretionary power of panel to accept/reject A.2.1.12

WTO Member briefs A.2.2.1-7

discretionary power of AB to accept/reject A.2.2.1-7

interference with “fair, prompt and effective resolution of trade disputes” and A.2.2.6

rights as third party (DSU 10.2 and 17.4), relevance A.2.2.4

burden of proof B.3.1.11-12

allocation

comparative difficulties of parties, relevance B.3.1.12

general rule/exception relationship, SPS 3.1 and 3.3 B.3.1.11-12

onus probandi actori incumbit as general principle of evidence B.3.1.11

compliance, WTO obligations, good faith / pacta sunt servanda principle P.3.1.9

due process (dispute settlement proceedings), amicus curiae briefs and A.2.2.6

good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VCLT 26)), compliance with WTO obligations P.3.1.9

information or technical advice, panel’s right to seek (DSU 13)

expert evidence/experts (DSU 13.2), “from any relevant source” S.4.12

panel’s rights, not to seek S.4.12

interpretation of covered agreements

applicable law, customary rules of interpretation of public international law [as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969)] P.3.4.5

object and purpose W.2.1.2

same or closely related phrases in different agreements B.3.1.11

non-retroactivity of treaties (VCLT 28) P.3.4.5

pre-existing rights, TBT Agreement T.5.3.1-2

procedure, fair, prompt and effective resolution of disputes and W.2.1.2

prompt and satisfactory resolution of disputes, Members’ right to (DSU 3), procedure, role W.2.1.2

SPS Agreement, harmonization of measures (SPS 3)

general rule/exception relationship (SPS 3.1 and 3.2), whether B.3.1.11

measures based on international standards (SPS 3.1), burden of proof B.3.1.11

standard of review (panels) (DSU 11)

evidence, alleged disregard or distortion by panel (“objective assessment of the facts”)

discretion/independence in evaluation of evidence S.7.3.12B

evidence introduced at interim review, right to ignore (DSU 15) S.7.3.13

TBT Agreement

applicability to pre-existing measures T.5.3.1-2

“international standards … as a basis for technical regulation” (TBT 2.4)

applicability to existing regulations T.4.5.1-3

“as the basis” T.4.3.1

“except when … ineffective or inappropriate” T.4.4.1

legitimacy of objective (TBT 2.2/2.4), relevance T.4.4.2

“relevant parts of them” T.4.3.2

legitimate objectives (TBT 2.2/2.4) T.4.4.2

standards (Annex 1.2), consensus, relevance (Annex 1.2 and Explanatory note) T.4.2.1

“technical regulation” (Annex 1.1) T.4.1.6-9

identifiability requirement T.4.1.7

naming and labelling distinguished T.4.1.9

third party rights W.2.9.7

AB proceedings (DSU 17.4/WP 24) W.2.9.7

passive participation in oral hearings W.2.9.7

Working Procedures (appellate review) (DSU 17.9)

object and purpose, fair, prompt and effective resolution of disputes W.2.1.2

withdrawal of appeal (AB/WP 30) W.2.13.1.3-6

conditioned on right to refile notice of appeal in accordance with WP 20 W.2.13.1.3-6

good faith and W.2.13.1.4-6

timing W.2.0.1

unconditional nature of right W.2.13.1.3-5

working schedule (WP 26), timing W.2.0.1

Working Procedures (panel) (DSU 12.1 and Appendix 3), review of evidence S.3.3.9

WTO Agreement, obligation to ensure conformity of domestic laws, regulations and administrative procedures (WTO XVI:4) W.4.3.1

 
EC — Selected Customs Matters (WT/DS315/AB/R)     back to top

competence (AB) (DSU 17.6)

completion of legal analysis

in case of panel’s failure to examine applicability of covered agreement C.4.34

factual basis

insufficiency C.4.34

limitation to panel’s findings or undisputed facts in panel record C.4.34

due process (independent judicial, arbitral and administrative review under GATT X:3(b)) P.5.3.2.4

implementation of DSB recommendations and rulings (DSU 21), choice of means at Member’s discretion I.0.5

implementation of panel or AB recommendations (DSU 19.1), expired measures, applicability to I.0.5, P.5.3.1.3, R.2.3.24-5, T.6.3.15-16

interpretation of covered agreements, object and purpose P.5.3.2.4-5

legal basis of claim (DSU 6.2) (request for establishment of panel)

arguments distinguished C.1.10, R.2.1.14, T.6.1.18, T.6.2.13

expired measure R.2.3.24-5, T.6.3.15-16

summary, sufficiency R.2.1.13 

legislation as such, right to challenge

challenge to system as a whole distinguished L.1.21

serious implications of such a challenge C.4.34

“matter referred to the DSB” (AD 17.4/DSU 7.1), identification of specific issues and legal basis of claim/complaint as dual requirements (DSU 6.2) R.2.1.13

non-discriminatory administration of quantitative restrictions (GATT XIII)

publication and administration of trade regulations (GATT X:3(a)) E.3.2.16-19

standard of proof E.3.2.16-17

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 R.2.3.23-4, T.6.3.14

publication and administration of trade regulations (GATT X)

independent judicial, arbitral or administrative review (GATT X:3(b))

as due process requirement P.5.3.2.4

first instance review, limitation to P.5.3.2.1

uniformity requirement (GATT X:3(a)) and P.5.3.2.2-4

laws, regulations, judicial decisions and administrative rulings, administration and existence of law, regulation, decision or ruling distinguished P.5.3.1.5-11

uniform, impartial and reasonable administration (GATT X:3(a)), standard of proof P.5.3.1.7, P.5.3.1.9-11

“specific measure at issue” (AD 17.4/DSU 6.2)

identification as part of the matter referred to the DSB, need for (AD 17.4/DSU 7.1) T.6.1.18

challenge to system as a whole and J.2.1.23, R.2.2.24-5, T.6.2.22-3

measure subsequent to establishment of panel having the “same effect” R.2.3.25

“specific”, “included but not necessarily limited to” R.2.1.14

legal basis of claim distinguished R.2.1.13, R.2.3.22, T.6.1.17, T.6.3.13

subsequent measures having the “same effect” R.2.3.25

means of compliance with finding of violation distinguished I.0.5, P.5.3.1.3, R.2.3.24, T.6.3.15

“measure” as basis of claim and as evidence distinguished E.3.1.9, P.5.3.1.4

standard of review (panels) (DSU 11)

evidence, alleged disregard or distortion by panel (“objective assessment of the facts”)

acts of administration post-dating establishment of panel, right to consider E.3.1.9, E.3.2.18, P.5.3.1.4, S.7.6.3-4

discretion in assessment of evidence E.3.2.19, S.7.3.32

discretion in selection of relevant evidence P.5.3.1.4

evidence introduced at interim review, right to ignore (DSU 15) E.3.1.10

“objective assessment of matter before it”, failure to analyse evidence P.5.3.1.11

Working Procedures (appellate review) (DSU 17.9), documents (WP 18), correction of clerical errors in submissions W.2.6A.3

 
EC — Tariff Preferences (WT/DS246/AB/R)     back to top

burden of proof

allocation, characterization as defence or claim to be proven for purposes of, relevance B.3.1.15, B.3.3.11

defences and exceptions

Enabling Clause B.3.3.8-14

inconsistency with GATT I:1, sufficiency as basis of complaint B.3.3.13-14, E.1.1.4

measures which result in a higher level of protection than international standards (SPS 3.3) B.3.3.8-14

permissive provision as defence/exception B.3.3.8

Enabling Clause, party’s two-stage obligation to raise and prove B.3.3.12

onus probandi actori incumbit as general principle of evidence, defences/exceptions and B.3.3.8-14

competence of panels and AB (DSU 3.2/DSU 11), right to develop own legal reasoning including arguments not adduced by parties (jura novit curia) P.3.2.1

Enabling Clause

conformity with GSP (generalized, non-reciprocal and non-discriminatory treatment), need for (Enabling Clause, para 2(a)) E.1.1.1-4

“discriminate” / “non-discriminatory” E.1.2.2-6

absence of clear qualifying criteria or standards E.1.2.7

identity of tariff preferences, need for E.1.2.3-7

least developed countries (para. 2(d)) and E.1.3.1

“generalized” E.1.2.4

“in accordance” E.1.2.1

as exception to GATT 1:1 B.3.3.9-10, E.1.1.1

inconsistency with GATT I:1 as preliminary step E.1.1.2

as integral part of WTO Agreement W.4.1.1

least developed countries (para. 2(d))

differential treatment under E.1.3.1

para. 2(a), independence of E.1.3.1

object and purpose

elimination of fragmented system of preferences E.1.2.4

facilitation and promotion of trade without raising of barriers/undue difficulties (para. 3(a)) E.1.4.1

improvement of developing countries’ share of growth in international trade (WTO, preamble) E.1.2.5, E.1.5.1

least developed countries E.1.5.1, W.4.1.1

preparatory work (VCLT 32) E.1.1.3, E.1.2.4

1971 Waiver Decision E.1.1.1, E.1.1.3

provision governing trade measures as opposed to non-trade measures, relevance to classification as B.3.3.10

treatment designed and … modified to respond to needs of developing countries (para. 3(c)) E.1.5

development, financial and trade needs, limitation to E.1.5.2

differential treatment, scope for E.1.5.1-2

objective standard, need for E.1.5.2

“positive” response E.1.5.2

interpretation of covered agreements

applicable law

customary rules of interpretation of public international law [as codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969)]

defences and exceptions B.3.3.11

DSU 3.2 B.3.1.15, B.3.3.11

dictionaries E.1.2.1

multiple authentic languages (VCLT 33) I.3.11.4

“stronger” language in two of three authentic languages, preference for I.3.11.4

object and purpose E.1.2.4-6

preamble as evidence of W.4.1.1

ordinary meaning E.1.1.2-3

preamble (WTO) E.1.5.1

preparatory work (VCLT 32), Enabling Clause E.1.2.4

legal basis of claim (DSU 6.2) (request for establishment of panel) R.2.2.17-19

summary, sufficiency

reference to Enabling Clause including specific provisions R.2.2.18-19, T.6.2.19

reference to GATT I:1 as including reference to Enabling Clause R.2.2.17

MFN treatment (GATT I) M.2.1.5

object and purpose M.2.1.5

request for establishment of panel, requirements (DSU 6.2), implied claims, exclusion T.6.2.19

third party rights W.2.9.8

AB proceedings (DSU 17.4/WP 24) W.2.9.8

passive participation in oral hearings, oral presentation W.2.9.8

WTO Agreement

integral parts (WTO II), applicability of preamble to all covered agreements W.4.1.1

object and purpose (preamble) W.4.1.1

 
EC — Tube or Pipe Fittings (WT/DS219/AB/R)     back to top

Anti-Dumping Agreement (AD) / GATT 1994 VI relationship, determination of dumping and calculation of dumping margin A.3.65.8

applicable law, determination of dumping and calculation of margins of dumping A.3.65.8

compliance, WTO obligations, good faith / pacta sunt servanda principle P.3.1.11

determination of dumping (AD 2)

calculation of administrative, selling and general costs and profits (AD 2.2.2), low volume sales, relevance (AD 2.2.2 chapeau) A.3.10.1-2

calculation of margins of dumping (AD 2.4), method, right to choose, GATT VI:2 and A.3.14.5, A.3.65.8

period of investigation (POI)

discretionary selection of data from period within POI A.3.2.1

duration, absence of provision A.3.2.1

determination of injury (AD 3/SCM 15)

country by country analysis / cumulative assessment of volume and prices (AD 3.3) A.3.20.1-2

country by country analysis, whether necessary A.3.20.1-2, A.3.21.2

rationale A.3.21.4

volume and prices as “effects” (AD 3.3) A.3.21.3

evaluation of injury factors (AD 3.4) A.3.22.7-9

evaluation of causal relationship (AD 3.5/SCM 15.5)

absence of provision for / freedom of choice A.3.22.7, A.3.22.9, A.3.24.8, E.3.2.4

collective effects, whether examination required A.3.26.1-3

injurious effects of dumped goods and of other factors, need to distinguish (AD 3.5/SCM 15.5) A.3.24.7, A.3.26.1

non-attribution to dumped imports of injury caused by other factors (AD 3.5/SCM 15.5) A.3.24.7-8, A.3.26.3

examination of other known factors (AD 3.5/SCM 15.5) A.3.25.1-4

dumping and injury analysis / causality analysis, distinguishability A.3.25.3-4

“known” to investigating authority A.3.25.1

other than dumped imports” A.3.25.1

simultaneous injury to domestic industry, need for A.3.25.1

growth A.3.22.8

manner of evaluation A.3.23.1-4

evidentiary rules (AD 6/SCM 12)

disclosure to interested parties of information relevant for presentation of case (AD 6.4) A.3.31.1

“relevant” A.3.32.1-3

“used by the authorities” A.3.32.1-3

full opportunity for defence of interests, right to (AD 6.2) A.3.31.1

disclosure obligation (AD 6.4) and A.3.31.1

good faith (including pacta sunt servanda principle (VCLT 26)), compliance with WTO obligations P.3.1.11

interpretation of covered agreements, context (VCLT 31(2)), GATT VI/AD, interrelationship A.3.65.8

specific action against dumping (AD 18.1) or subsidy (SCM 32.1), requirements, accordance with provisions of GATT VI as interpreted by Anti-Dumping Agreement A.3.65.8

standard/powers of review (AB) (AD 17.6)

assessment of the facts (AD 17.6(i)) A.3.59.10

error, need to substantiate A.3.59.10

 


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