This summary has been prepared by the Secretariat under its own responsibility. The summary is for general information only and is not intended to affect the rights and obligations of Members.
back to top
(as cited in request for consultations)
|Request for Consultations received:|
|Panel Report circulated:||31 October 2018|
back to top
back to top
Summary of the dispute to date
The summary below was up-to-date at
Complaint by Turkey
On 3 October 2016, Turkey requested consultations with Morocco regarding the imposition of definitive anti-dumping measures, and certain aspects of the underlying investigation, by Morocco on imports of certain hot-rolled steel from Turkey.
Turkey claimed that the measures appear to be inconsistent with:
- Articles 1, 3.1, 3.2, 3.4, 3.5, 5.10, 6.8, 6.9, 18.1 and paragraph 1, 3, 5, 6 and 7 Annex II of the Anti-Dumping Agreement; and
- Articles 3.2 and 3.3 of the Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures; and
- Articles I:1, VI, X:1, X:2, X:3(a) and XI:1 of the GATT 1994.
Panel and Appellate Body proceedings
On 12 January 2017, Turkey requested the establishment of a panel. At its meeting on 25 January 2017, the DSB deferred the establishment of a panel.
At its meeting on 20 February 2017, the DSB established a panel. China, Egypt, the European Union, India, Japan, Kazakhstan, Korea, Oman, the Russian Federation, Singapore, United Arab Emirates and the United States reserved their third-party rights.
On 8 May 2017, Turkey requested the Director-General to compose the panel. On 17 May 2017, the Director-General composed the panel.
On 12 October 2017, the Chair of the panel informed the DSB that the beginning of the panel's work had been delayed as a result of a lack of available lawyers in the Secretariat. The panel expected to issue its final report to the parties in mid-2018.
DS513 concerns a dispute between Turkey and Morocco. It relates to anti-dumping measures imposed by Morocco on certain hot-rolled steel products from Turkey.
The dispute raised novel questions regarding the issue of “material retardation of the establishment of the domestic industry”. Footnote 9 to Article 3 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement defines that “injury” of the domestic industry may take the form of “material retardation of the establishment of the domestic industry”; Article VI:6(a) of the GATT 1994 contains a similar reference. Turkey brought a number of claims in respect of Morocco's determination that the establishment of the domestic industry producing certain hot-rolled steel products in Morocco had been materially retarded as a result of dumped imports from Turkey. For jurisdictional and procedural grounds, the Panel denied making findings on Turkey's claims under footnote 9 and Article VI:6(a). It found, however, that Morocco had acted inconsistently with Article 3.1 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement in determining that the domestic industry was “unestablished” and with Articles 3.1 and 3.4 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement in evaluating whether Turkish imports had “materially retarded” that industry's establishment.
As regards a number of Turkey's procedural claims under Articles 6.5, 6.5.1 and 6.9 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, the Panel declined to rule for jurisdictional or procedural reasons, or it found that Turkey had not established its claim. The Panel, however, found that Morocco had acted inconsistently with Article 5.10 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement by failing to conclude the investigation within the 18-month maximum time-limit set out in that provision. It also found that Morocco had acted inconsistently with Article 6.9 by failing to inform all interested parties of certain “essential facts”.
The Panel also found that Morocco had acted inconsistently with Article 6.8 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement by rejecting the reported information and establishing the margins of dumping for the two investigated Turkish producers based on facts available. The Panel did not find it necessary to address Turkey's additional claims in this regard under paragraphs 1, 3, 5, 6, and 7 of Annex II.
The Panel declined Turkey's request that the Panel exercise its discretion under the second sentence of Article 19.1 of the DSU and suggest that Morocco immediately revoke the measures at issue.
On 20 November 2018, Morocco notified the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body certain issues of law and legal interpretations in the panel report.
Problems viewing this page? If so, please contact email@example.com giving details of the operating system and web browser you are using.