175pxls.gif (78 bytes)

 SUR CETTE PAGE:   Adoption of agenda   Groupes spéciaux   Mise en œuvre    Prochaine réunion

accueil > nouvelles > nouvelles 2008 > nouvelles


OMC: NOUVELLES 2008


Différends à l'OMC
Comment trouver des différends
Comment trouver des documents liés aux différends

Différend par ordre chronologique
Différends par sujet
Différends par pays

  

VOIR AUSSI:
Communiqués de presse
Nouvelles
Allocutions: Pascal Lamy

   

NOTE:
Le présent résumé a été établi par la Division de l'information et des relations avec les médias du Secrétariat de l'OMC pour aider le public à mieux comprendre l'évolution des différends à l'OMC. Il ne constitue ni une interprétation juridique ni un compte rendu complet des différends. Pour cela, il existe les rapports eux-mêmes et les comptes rendus des réunions de l'Organe de règlement des différends.

Adoption of agenda  haut de page

At the start of the meeting before the agenda was adopted, Japan drew attention to item 4 on the agenda dealing with DS322 “US measures relating to zeroing and sunset reviews”.

Japan stated that in the communication circulated prior to the meeting (WT/DS322/25) the United States objected to the level of retaliation proposed by Japan, and hence the DSB was not in a position to grant authorization as requested by Japan in WT/DS322/23 and WT/DS322/24 because the matter had been referred to arbitration under DSU Article 22.6.

Japan also noted that the adoption of the agenda without item 4 did not constitute a withdrawal of its request for DSB authorization to retaliate.

The US spoke briefly to concur with Japan's statement.

The DSB adopted the agenda without item 4.

 

Établissement de groupes spéciaux  haut de page

DS367: Australie — Mesures affectant l'importation de pommes en provenance de Nouvelle-Zélande

The DSB established a panel following New Zealand's second time request (WT/DS367/5) to review measures affecting market access of its apples into Australia. At the previous meeting on 17 December 2007, New Zealand had claimed that these measures were not scientifically justified and were inconsistent with the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement.

At the present meeting, New Zealand said that bilateral discussions had not resulted in a mutually agreed solution which was the reason why it requested a panel for the second time.

Australia said it was disappointed at New Zealand's request and said the measures it took were consistent with WTO rules. Australia added that it would bring procedural deficiencies to the attention of the panel.

Japan, US, Chinese Taipei, Chile and the EC reserved their third party rights.

 

Mise en œuvre  haut de page

DS322: États-Unis — Mesures relatives à la réduction à zéro et aux réexamens à l’extinction

The US presented a status report on progress in the implementation of the DSB ruling.

The US said it had complied with the DSB recommendations and rulings in this dispute.

Japan welcomed the statement by the US that it had ceased using the zeroing methodology and its commitment to implement the DSB recommendations. Despite these positive steps, Japan said the US only addressed a part of the DSB ruling.

Japan said that, in view of the lack of action by the US, it had requested authorisation from the DSB to suspend tariff concessions to the US (WT/DS322/23 and WT/DS322/24). Japan urged the US to fully bring its measures into conformity with the DSB recommendations.

The EC said that it was also waiting for the US to comply with the DSB ruling in a case it had initiated against the zeroing methodology (WT/DS294). The EC said it had also instigated a new dispute as a result of the continued application of zeroing by the US (WT/DS350). The EC said that zeroing had been subject to numerous litigations since the first case in 1998. The EC said that 12 disputes had been brought against the US on the use of zeroing. The EC added that there was no doubt left that zeroing run foul of fundamental obligations of the Antidumping Agreement. The EC hoped that the US would put an end to all remaining illegal zeroing practices.

The US said that it was apparent that there was a disagreement between Japan and the US over the measures adopted to implement the DSB recommendations. The US said that as a leading proponent of sequencing, Japan should have had recourse to Article 21.5 before resorting to Article 22.2 of the DSU to suspend tariff concessions to the US.

The EC said that it was in favour of sequencing mechanisms in a case of genuine disagreement on implementation, and that recourse should first be made to Article 21.5 and then to Article 22.6.

Japan said the US had to do more to bring its measures into full conformity with the DSB rulings. Japan added that the decision to request authorization to retaliate was because of the lack of progress in the implementation of the DSB recommendations. Japan concluded it was willing to conclude a sequencing agreement with the US.
  

DS291 / DS292 / DS293: Communautés européennes — Mesures affectant l’approbation et la commercialisation des produits biotechnologiques

The EC presented a status report (WT/DS291/37WT/DS292/31WT/DS293/31) on progress made in the implementation of the DSB ruling.

In this dispute, the reasonable period of time for implementation had expired on 21 November 2007 and was extended until 11 January 2008.
The EC said that it had held regular technical discussions with the three complainants. The EC declared that Argentina and Canada agreed to a second extension of the reasonable period of time, respectively up to 5 months (until 11 June 2008) and 1 month (until 11 February 2008).

The EC said that while the US tabled a retaliation request, it had concluded a sequencing agreement (WT/DS291/38) that would suspend the request until compliance procedures (Article 21.5 of DSU) are concluded.

The EC stated that 17 applications had been approved since the panel was established and, in 2007, seven new products were authorised.
The EC added that four other products would possibly be approved early 2008.

Argentina said that technical meetings with the EC were very positive. Argentina confirmed that it had agreed to further extend the reasonable period of time to 5 months (until 11 June 2008) since new major advances may be achieved.

Canada said it had held discussions with the EC on a technical level. Canada confirmed that it agreed to further extend the reasonable period of time to 1 month (until 11 February 2008) in order to pursue the technical dialogue. Canada expected that discussions would yield progress.

The US said it was concerned that some EC Member States would still apply bans found in breach of the EC's WTO obligations while additional Members had adopted new ones.

The US said it had been very patient throughout this dispute and preserved its rights by filing a request for authorisation to suspend concessions.

The US said it had entered with the EC into a sequencing agreement (WT/DS291/38) under which the request would be referred to arbitration. The US added that the arbitration proceedings would be suspended for a limited period. The US said this process was intended to encourage further discussion and cooperation with the EC.

The US declared that there was a limit to how long it could wait before further exercising its rights under the DSU. The US concluded that it looked forward to continuing its dialogue with the EC.


DS217: États-Unis — Loi de 2000 sur la compensation pour continuation du dumping et maintien de la subvention

At the request of the EC and Japan, the DSB discussed the ‘Byrd Amendment’ case and the implementation of the ruling by the US.

The EC and Japan said that the US had just completed a UDS262 million distribution to its industry.

The EC said this would bring to USD2 billion the total amount that had been distributed so far and called on the US to abide by its obligations under the DSU.

Japan added that the US had repealed the Byrd Amendment only in form but was still operational.

The US said it had repealed the Byrd Amendment and had taken all actions necessary to implement the ruling.

India, China, Canada, Thailand and Brazil supported the EC's and Japan's statements.

  

Prochaine réunion  haut de page

La prochaine réunion de l'ORD aura lieu le 19 février 2008

Des problèmes pour visualiser cette page?
Veuillez écrire à webmaster@wto.org en indiquant le système d’exploitation et le navigateur que vous utilisez.

150pxls.gif (76 bytes)

contactez-nous : Organisation mondiale du commerce, rue de Lausanne 154, CH-1211 Genève 21, Suisse