 |
|
|
 |
|
|
| 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 |
