WTO: 2005 NEWS ITEMS
Dispute Settlement Body 28 November 2005
The DSB adopts rulings on Korea anti-dumping duties on certain paper from Indonesia and US anti-dumping measures on oil country tubular Goods from Mexico
On 28 November 2005, the DSB adopted panel report concerning Korea anti-dumping duties on certain paper from Indonesia (DS312); and panel and appellate body reports pertaining to United-States anti-dumping measures on oil country tubular goods from Mexico (DS282).
This summary has been prepared by the WTO Secretariat’s Information and Media Relations Division to help public understanding about developments in WTO disputes. It is not a legal interpretation of the issues, and it is not intended as a complete account of the issues. These can be found in the reports themselves and in the minutes of the Dispute Settlement Body’s meetings.
Adoption of Appellate Body and Panel reports
When a panel report comes out, it is either adopted by the Dispute
Settlement Body or appealed by one or more main parties to the dispute.
When the Appellate Body report comes out, it is automatically adopted by
the DSB — unless there is consensus to reject it — and becomes binding.
DS312: Korea — Anti-Dumping Duties on Imports of Certain paper from Indonesia
Indonesia was pleased with the overall panel's finding and expressed trust that Korea would promptly comply with rulings.
While Korea did not agree with all aspects of the panel's decision, it
admitted that a careful review of the evidence and the submissions of the
parties were done by the panel before reaching its conclusions. Korea
added that among dozens of issues identified by Indonesia under the WTO
Anti-dumping Agreement, the panel found in the Korean Trade Commission (KTC),
the Korean government agency whose determinations in the anti-dumping
investigation were subject of Indonesia's claims, only a few inconsistent
minor procedural matters. Consequently, Korea would undertake the steps
necessary to remove those questions about KTC.
The EC said that the dispute considered for the first time the issue of whether the Anti-dumping Agreement (Article 6.10), when requiring to determine an individual margin of dumping for each known exporter, calculates a separate dumping margin for each separate legal entities. The EC noted that the panel conclusion was of particular practical importance for the effectiveness of the Agreement.
DS282: United States — Anti-Dumping Measures on Oil Country Tubular Goods (OCTG) from Mexico
The Mexican delegate said that although Mexico won this case, it did not win the appeal. It added that the manner in which the Appellate Body dismissed Mexico's claims, particularly those related to the Sunset Policy Bulletin (SPB), should be a strong systemic concern to all WTO members.
The US was pleased that the Appellate Body upheld the panel's findings on likelihood of injury and the margin to prevail. In addition it welcomed that the Appellate Body reversed the panel's finding that the SPB was inconsistent with WTO obligations.
Among other speakers, the EC welcomed the reiteration by the panel that the SPB is a measure that may be challenged as such within the WTO system. It noted also with satisfaction that this specific issue was not subject to appeal. Argentina also stated that the panel report had one more time concluded the WTO inconsistency of the Sunset review. Hong Kong China highlighted one particular issue in the sunset review which is the causation.
back to top
Request for panel establishment
These are cases that have completed the consultation phase, the first
stage of a dispute. When consultations have failed, member governments are
entitled to ask for a panel to be set up to examine the dispute. According
to the rules, the respondent can reject the first request. At the second
request, a panel is automatically established.
DS332: Brazil — Measures affecting imports of retreaded tyres
The EC requested for the first time the establishment of a panel for
examining Brazilian discriminatory measures against EC imports of
retreated tyres. It added that the import ban was violating some of the
most fundamental rules of the GATT 1994.
Brazilian delegate replied that the EC brought against Brazil a very special product since waste tyres were definitely the most problematic waste to deal with. It added that tyres were also a source of significant public health concerns. In light of the foregoing, Brazil rejected the request made by the EC.
back to top
After a ruling has been adopted, the DSB keeps under surveillance the
implementation of the ruling until the issue is resolved.
Within 30 days after the date of adoption, the Member concerned must inform the DSB of its intentions in respect of implementation of the ruling.
Six months after the implementation time period has been fixed, the Member must start presenting at each DSB a status report of its implementation — until full implementation.
DS176: US — Section 211 Omnibus Appropriations Act of 1998
The US reported that the US Administration was working with Congress to
implement the DSB's rulings.
The EC recalled that the third anniversary of the initial 31 December 2002 deadline granted to the US was approaching. In addition, it said that 5 months had already elapsed since the expiry of the extended implementation period on 30 June 2005. Cuba added that there was absolutely no legal or moral reason for the Section 211 to be in force three years after the DSB made its decision. Cuba urged the EU to abolish this Section.
DS184: US — Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Steel
The US said that the US Administration continued to work with US Congress
to enact legislation to implement the DSB's rulings.
Japan said that it had been waiting for the passage of the bill introduced in Congress on 19 May 2005 that would amend the relevant US anti-dumping. It took note that the US Administration continued to work with Congress to pass this legislation.
The US announced that a budget reconciliation legislation, including the repeal of the CDSOA, was approved by the House Committee on Ways and Means on 26 October 2005. Hereafter, the full House passed legislation on 18 November 2005. A Conference Committee would now consider the bill.
The EC welcomed this significant step in implementation but added that it
was not the end of it. It hoped that the Congress would now complete the
legislative process to repeal the Byrd Amendment.
Canada took note of the latest report showing important and encouraging development. Canada affirmed that trade sanctions were not the preferred means but the measures were judged necessary to protect Canadian interests.
Among other speakers, Japan said that its countermeasures shall be taken only temporarily until the implementation of the DSB's rulings is duly secured. Also, Japan urged the US Senate to consider the legislation favourably.
DS160: US — Section 110(5) of the US Copyright Act
The US said that US Administration continued to work closely with the US
Congress and continued to confer with the EC.
The EC expressed concerns about the lack of progress in the US legislation. Nevertheless, the EC placed trust in the US for remedying this unfortunate situation. Finally, the EC recalled that it had reserved its rights to reactive at any point in time the arbitration on its retaliation request.
DS212: US — Countervailing measures concerning certain products from the EC
The DSB adopted recommendations and rulings of the compliance review panel (Article 21.5 of the DSU) by the EC on 27 September 2005.
In its first statement since the adoption of the implementation panel report, the US said that it continued to take steps to implement the DSB rulings.
The EC, disappointed, said that the US status report was extremely short and provided no information on the US intention. As a consequence, the EC submitted a number of questions for clarification. The US replied that these questions would be referred for proper consideration to the US capital.
back to top
DS269: EC — Customs Classification of Frozen Boneless Chicken Cuts
Brazil circulated on 22 November 2005 a request for arbitration of the reasonable period of time for the EC implementation of the rulings. At this DSB meeting, Brazil registered dissatisfaction. It said that the EC stated its intention to implement the DSB recommendations in a reasonable period of time. But the conditions presented by the EC left Brazil, as it mentioned, with no other option than requesting an arbitration.
The EC expressed some perplexity, explaining that the EC was in perfect line with the Dispute Settlement Understanding. The EC added that so far it has not yet received reaction from other co-complainant (Thailand).
back to top
A special meeting of the regular DSB will take place on 6 December 2005.
The next regular meeting of the DSB will be on 20 January 2006.